/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/160516.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Monday, May 16, 2016, Vol. 18, No. 97 Headlines 21ST CENTURY: Faces "Birken-Sikora" Class Suit in M.D. Florida AAC HOLDINGS: Consolidated Amended Complaint Filed ADCARE HEALTH: 3 Settlement Agreements Pending ADVANCED DRAINAGE: Defending Against "Wyche" Action AETERNA ZENTARIS: Asked Court to Reconsider Class Action Ruling AL-FLEX EXTERMINATORS: Faces Fla. Lawsuit Over FLSA Violation AMERICAN EAGLE: "Dioum" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages & Meal Breaks AMERICAN HONDA: Order Closing Final Judgment Entered in "Soto" AMERICAN HONDA: Recalls Off-Highway Vehicles Due to Injury Risk AMERICAN IN-HOME: Faces "Eutsey" Suit Seeking OT Pay Under FLSA APPLIANCE RECYCLING: Defending Gray-Boller Action in Minnesota APPLIANCE RECYCLING: "Feola" Class Action Forwarded to Insurance ARCHER WELL: Stanley Seeks Class Certification for MWD Workers AT&T MOBILITY: Faces "Sandoval" Suit in Cal. Over Unpaid Wages AUTO DREAMS: "Ramirez" Class Suit Removed to Dist. New Jersey AVANGRID INC: Certification of Shareholder Class Sought BANAMEX USA: "Blatt" Class Suit Voluntarily Dismissed BANK OF AMERICA: "Naranjo" Class Action Settlement Has Final Okay BEDNEST LTD: Recalls Bedside Sleepers Due to Fall Hazard BELTLINE ROAD: Sued in S.D. Fla. Over Lender-Placed Insurance BEST BM: "Rodriguez" Suit Seeks Earned Wages Under FLSA BHH LLC: Court Narrows Claims in "Hart" Suit BHP BILLITON: Artificially Inflated ADRs, "Katz" Suit Alleges BIG LOTS: Securities Action Entering Early Stages of Discovery BLOOMIN' BRANDS: Sued in S.D. Tex. Over Gender Discrimination BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM: Faces "Christie" Suit Over Pradaxa(R) Drugs BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM: Faces "Manlove" Suit Over Pradaxa(R) Drugs BRAND SCAFFOLD: Faces "Thomas" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime BRIM'S FOOD: "Scott" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages Under FLSA BROOKLYN EVENTS: Sued in E.D.N.Y. Over Sexual Harassment BRP US: Recalls Side-by-Side Off-Road Vehicles Due to Crash Risk BUCKS COUNTY, PA: Bid for Class Cert. of "Baha" Suit Granted C&J ENERGY: Conditional Class Cert. of "Esparza" Suit Affirmed CALERES INC: Settlement Payments Made in 2015 Fourth Quarter CARIBOU COFFEE: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, "Farnham" Suit Claims CASTLIGHT HEALTH: Parties Reached Mediated Cash Settlement CEC ENTERTAINMENT: "Ford" Settlement Administration Dates Changed CHEMOIL ENERGY: Faces "Valdez" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime CHICAGO TRANSIT: Illinois Rules on "Matthews" Appeal CHINA CAFETERIA: Faces Suit in Ga. for FLSA Violation CHRYSLER: Recalls 300 2012 Models Due to Crash Risk CITY DEE: "Zacarias" Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime Pay CLOVIS ONCOLOGY: Electrical Workers Suit Remanded to San Mateo COLLECTIONS BUREAU: Bid to Dismiss "Brown" Suit Denied CONN'S INC: Hearing on Securities Action Postponed Sine Die COSTCO WHOLESALE: 9th Cir. Rules on "Maple" Appeal COX COMMUNICATIONS: "Feeney" Sues Over Premium Cable Tie-up CREDIT ONE: Minor "AD" Seeks Certification of TCPA Class CYBEX INTERNATIONAL: Recalls Free Weight Benches DAYBREAK VENTURE: Fails to Pay Employees OT, "Ross" Action Claims DELTA OUTSOURCE: Illegally Collects Debt,"Hamra" Suit Claims DEUTSCHE BANK: 9th Cir. Affirms Dismissal of "Anderson" Claims DIGITEK COMPUTER: Joint Bid to Notify "Viciedo" Class Granted EDAP TMS S.A.: Plaintiff Did Not Appeal Dismissal ELOCAL USA: Sued in Cal. Super. Ct. Over Phone Call Recording EMSP LLC: Certification of Independent Contractors Class Sought EQUITY RESIDENTIAL: Sued in N.Y. Sup. Ct. Over Rent Overcharges FACEBOOK INC: Faces Suit Over Collection of Cancer Patients' Info FACEBOOK INC: Sued in Delaware Over Reclassification of Share FACEBOOK INC: Ill. Law Applies to Privacy Litigation, Court Says FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT: "Rajagopalan" Settlement Has Initial Okay FIRST NBC BANK: "Kinzler" Sues Over Share Price Drop FIRST STUDENT: "Jackson" Suit Seeks to Recover Overtime Pay FITBIT: Faces Shareholders' Class Action Over IPO FORD: Recalls 2009 and 2008 Vehicle Models Due to Noncompliance FORD: Recalls Multiple Vehicle Models Due to Injury Risk FORD: Recalls Multiple Vehicle Models Due to Crash Risk FORD: Recalls Explorer 2014 Models Due to Crash Risk FORD MOTOR: Bids to Dismiss "Philips" Warranty Claims Denied FOUR OAKS: Class Suit Stayed Pending Arbitration Motions FOX INSTITUTE: Sued in Conn. Super. Ct. Over Employment Practices GARDA CL: "Tessono" Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime Pay GARDA CL: "Moreno" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages GLOBAL PAYMENTS: Defending Class Suits Over Heartland Acquisition GRUPPO CHIARELLO: "Page" Suit Seeks Minimum Wage HOBART SERVICE: Alcantar Supplements Bid for Class Certification HUMPHREY RICH: Faces "Rojas-Rios" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT IDENTIV INC: "Ruggiero" Class Action Voluntarily Dismissed IDENTIV INC: Facing Shareholder Actions in N.D. Cal. INTERSTATE CLEANING: "Rodriguez" Removed Suit to Dist. Florida INTREXON CORP: "Gibrall" Sues Over Share Price Drop JAVELIN MORTGAGE: Baltimore Court Rejects Injunction Bid JIMMY MCDUFFIE: Faces "Scott" Suit in S.D. Ga. JOE TEX XPRESS: "Crump" Labor Suit Transferred to E.D. Tex. JOHN WETZEL: Faces "Stradford" Suit in E.D. Penn. KARL STORZ: Sued in Cal. Super. Ct. Over Use of Storz Morcellator KENSINGTON PROFESSIONAL: Bid to Stay "Weisberg" Suit Denied KS RENOVATION: "Puma" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages LA MESA RV: "Hoffer" Suit to Recover Minimum Pay LANNETT CO: Faces "Diamond" Lawsuit Over Digoxin "Price Fixing" LEMON-X CORP: "Cuevas" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay LIBERTY ACQUISITIONS: No Arbitration for "Nelson" Suit LIFETIME ENTERTAINMENT: 2nd Circuit Appeal Lodged in "Leyse" Case LOS ANGELES HOUSING: Court Certifies Two Classes in "Nozzi" Suit LUCKY FLUKE: "Romero" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages Under FLSA LUNA INNOVATIONS: Court Issued Final Order Approving Settlement MATT PAK: Sued in Ill. Cir. Ct. Over Release of Documents MCCABE WEISBERG: Wright Seeks Certification of New Yorkers Class MICHAEL HARRISON: Faces "Masuda" Suit in D.N.J. MISTRAS GROUP: Mediation Talks Failed, Class Action Pending MUNCHKIN INC: Recalls Pacifiers and Clips Due to Choking Hazard MURRIETA POLICE: Certification Bid Taken Under Submission NAPLES FLORIDA: "Fox" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay NATIONAL FOOTBALL: Faces "Scroggins" Suit in E.D. Penn. NATIONAL FOOTBALL: Players Sue Law Firms Over Settlement Proceeds NEW ORLEANS, LA: Court Narrows Claims in "Cain" Civil Rights Suit NEWPORT CORPORATION: Amended Complaint Filed in "Chung" Action NEWPORT CORPORATION: Faces "Pincon" Class Action in Nevada NEW YORK TIMES: "Grant" Sues over Discrimination NISSAN: Recalls Sentra 2013 Model NISSAN: Recalls Multiple Vehicle Models Due to Defective Airbag NORTH MERRICK: "Mendoza" Suit Seeks Unpaid OT Under Labor Law NORTHLAND GROUP: Faces "Zippel" Suit in E.D.N.Y. NOVARTIS CORPORATION: "Dickerson" Suit Moved to Texas Dist. Ct. NQ MOBILE: Final Order Approving Settlement Issued NQ MOBILE: Still Defends "Finocchiaro" Class Action in N.Y. NRA GROUP: Joseph Bernal Seeks Certification of FDCPA Class OGLETHORPE POWER: Still Defends Patronage Capital Litigation OLD NATIONAL: Settlement of Merger Litigation Reached OMARA LLC: "Coleman" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay OMG TACO CORP: "Hernandez" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay PATTERSON COMPANIES: Sued in E.D.N.Y. Over Marketing Conspiracy PIERRE LANDSCAPE: Sued in Cal. Super. Ct. Over Unpaid Wages PD LONG ISLAND: "Servius" Suit Seeks Gratuities Under Labor Law PETERBILT: Recalls 567 Vehicle 2016 Models Due to Noncompliance PHILADELPHIA FINANCIAL: Suit by Fishman Insurance Trust Dismissed PHOENIX LIFE: Court Denies Bid to Certify "Shevlin" Suit PLATINUM SUPPLEMENTAL: Certification of 2 "Flynn" Classes Sought PROSKAUER ROSE: Faces "Dorrel" Suit Over Standford Scheme RAINERI CONSTRUCTION: Wendelle Emily Seeks Class Certification RALPH LAUREN: Faces "Dennis" Suit Over Misleading Ads RECREATIONAL EQUIPMENT: Violated California Disabled Persons Act REDFROG ENTERPRISES: Recalls Fish Cake Products Due to Egg REGUS MANAGEMENT: Court Won't Reconsider Denial of Class Cert. ROBERT BOSCH: Recalls Small Angle Grinders Due to Burn Hazard RODALE INC: Sept. 7 Final Hearing on "Courter-Owens" Settlement ROSS STORES: Class Action Litigation Remains Pending SANTA FE NATURAL: Sued in M.D. Fla. Over Deceptive Trade Practice SHASTA: Recalls Travel Trailers 2015 Models Due to Injury Risk STANLEY M. GLASER: Faces "Carbonell" Suit in S.D. Fla. STAR SPORTS: Fails to Pay Wages on Time, "Escobar" Suit Claims STARBUCKS CORP: Chicago Suit Alleges Under-Filling of Iced Drinks SUNRISE SENIOR: Sued in Ohio Common Pleas Ct. Over Discrimination SUNRUN INC: "Baker" Files Securities Class Action in Calif. TEACHERS INSURANCE: Sued in S.D.N.Y. Over Retirement Plan Losses TERRAFORM GLOBAL: Reviewing Class Action Litigations TEXAS: "Watson" Suit Over Traffic Cameras Remanded to State Court TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS: "Huffman" Suit Status Hearing Set for July 25 TRINET GROUP: To Defend Against "Welgus" Securities Class Action TRIPLE-S MANAGEMENT: Joint Underwriting Assoc. Litigations Update TRIPLE-S MANAGEMENT: Discovery Ongoing in Blue Cross Litigation TUMI STORES: Faces "Gomez" Suit in S.D. Fla. TWINGO LLC: Recalls Baby Carriers U.S. QUALITY: "Harter" Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime Under FLSA UBER TECHNOLOGIES: "Suarez" FLSA Suit Sent to Arbitration UNITED STATES: Class Certification Sought in Suit v. Immigration UNITED STATES: Just Compensation Ruling Entered VINOCE VINEYARDS: Aug. 2 Case Management Conference Set VIOLIN MEMORY: Final Settlement Approval Hearing Set for July 26 VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Farnbauch" Suit in S.D. Ind. VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Sherfey" Suit Remanded to Lorain County Court VONAGE AMERICA: "Merkin" Suit Sent to Arbitration WALGREENS BOOTS: Appeal in Class Action Lawsuit in Early Stage WALGREENS BOOTS: Still Defends Securities Case in Illinois WALGREENS BOOTS: Class Suits Over Rite Aid Merger Pending WARREN UNILUBE: "Jones" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay Under FLSA WEATHERFORD INTERNATIONAL: "Grinenko" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay WILHELMINA INTERNATIONAL: Hearing This Month on Motion to Dismiss WILLIAM COOK: Recalls Transjugular Intrahepatic Shunt Pack XPO LOGISTICS: "Hernandez" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages ********* 21ST CENTURY: Faces "Birken-Sikora" Class Suit in M.D. Florida -------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been commenced against 21st Century Oncology Holdings, Inc., 21st Century Oncology, LLC, 21st Century Oncology, Inc., 21st Century Oncology Management Services, Inc., and 21st Century Oncology Services, LLC. The case is captioned Gayle Birken-Sikora, Matthew Sikora, Susan Lewin, Jeffrey Lewin, Jon Lokietz, Caryn Bendetowies, and Rita Marx, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. 21st Century Oncology Holdings, Inc., 21st Century Oncology, LLC, 21st Century Oncology, Inc.,21st Century Oncology Management Services, Inc., and 21st Century Oncology Services, LLC, Case No. 2:16-cv-00334-UA-CM (M.D. Fla., May 5, 2016). The Defendants are in the business of providing radiation therapy and cancer treatments. The Plaintiff is represented by: Joshua H. Eggnatz, Esq. Michael James Pascucci, Esq. THE EGGNATZ LAW FIRM, PA 5400 S University Dr Ste 413 1920 N Commerce Pkwy Davie, FL 33328-5313 Telephone: (954) 634-4355 Facsimile: (954) 634-4342 E-mail: JEggnatz@ELPLawyers.com mpascucci@elplawyers.com AAC HOLDINGS: Consolidated Amended Complaint Filed -------------------------------------------------- AAC Holdings, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 9, 2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that a consolidated amended complaint has been filed in the consolidated cases, Kasper v. AAC Holdings, Inc. et al. and Tenzyk c. AAC Holdings, Inc. et al. On August 24, 2015, a shareholder filed a purported class action in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee against the Company and certain of its current and former officers. The plaintiff generally alleges that the Company and certain of its current and former officers violated Sections 10(b) and/or 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by making allegedly false and/or misleading statements and failing to disclose certain information. On September 14, 2015, a second class action against the same defendants asserting essentially the same allegations was filed in the same court. On October 26, 2015, the court entered an order consolidating these two described actions into one action. On February 29, 2016, the plaintiff filed a consolidated amended complaint. The Company intends to defend this action vigorously. At this time the Company cannot predict the results of this litigation with certainty, and cannot estimate the amount or range of loss, if any. The Company believes the disposition of this action will not have a material adverse effect on its consolidated results of operations or consolidated financial position. The Company is a provider of inpatient substance abuse treatment services for individuals with drug and alcohol addiction. ADCARE HEALTH: 3 Settlement Agreements Pending ---------------------------------------------- AdCare Health Systems, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 30, 2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that as of March 28, 2016, all but three of the individual settlement agreements had been approved and the settlement consideration paid to the plaintiffs. The Company is a defendant in a purported class action lawsuit captioned Amy Cleveland et al. v. APHR&R Nursing, LLC et al, filed on March 4, 2015 with the Circuit Court of Pulaski County, Arkansas, 16th Division, 6th Circuit (the "Complaint"). The Complaint asserted claims on behalf of a purported class consisting of the residents at: (i) Stone County Nursing and Rehabilitation Center; (ii) Bentonville Manor Nursing Home; (iii) Heritage Park Nursing Center; (iv) Homestead Manor Nursing Home; (v) River Valley Health and Rehabilitation Center; (vi) Northridge Healthcare and Rehabilitation; (vii) Woodland Hills Healthcare and Rehabilitation; (viii) West Markham Sub Acute and Rehabilitation Center; and (ix) Cumberland Health and Rehabilitation Center, all of which were managed by subsidiaries or affiliates of the Company. The lawsuit alleged that the nine facilities were understaffed during the class period which resulted in breaches or violation of the nursing home admission agreements, the Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, and the Long Term Care Facilities Residents' Act. The Complaint also included individual negligence claims on behalf of former deceased resident Amy Cleveland. The Complaint sought certification of a class of residents consisting of all residents of the facilities during the class period, judgment against all defendants for actual, compensatory and punitive damages and attorney fees. With respect to the allegations concerning Amy Cleveland, the Complaint sought damages for injuries, general and special damages, prejudgment and post- judgment interest, attorney fees and punitive damages. On December 16, 2015, the Company's insurance carrier reached a settlement with each of the individual plaintiffs on behalf of the Company and all other defendants pursuant to which separate payments are to be made by the Company's carrier to the plaintiffs. The individual settlements are contingent on approval by the probate courts having jurisdiction over the deceased plaintiffs' respective estates, if applicable. As of March 28, 2016, all but three of the individual settlement agreements had been approved and the settlement consideration paid to the plaintiffs. AdCare Health Systems, Inc. is a self-managed real estate investment company that invests primarily in real estate purposed for long-term care and senior living. ADVANCED DRAINAGE: Defending Against "Wyche" Action --------------------------------------------------- Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2016, for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2015, that the Company will vigorously defend against the case by Christopher Wyche. On July 29, 2015, a putative stockholder class action, Christopher Wyche, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Advanced Drainage Systems, Inc., et al. (Case No. 1:15-cv- 05955-KPF), was commenced in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleges that the Company made material misrepresentations and/or omissions of material fact in its public disclosures during the period from September 5, 2014 through July 14, 2015, in violation of Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. Plaintiffs seek an unspecified amount of monetary damages on behalf of the putative class and an award of costs and expenses, including counsel fees and expert fees. The Company believes that it has valid and meritorious defenses and will vigorously defend against these allegations. While it is reasonably possible that this matter ultimately could be decided unfavorably to the Company, the Company is currently unable to estimate the range of the possible losses, but they could be material. The Company is a manufacturer of high performance thermoplastic corrugated pipe, providing a comprehensive suite of water management products and superior drainage solutions for use in the underground construction and infrastructure marketplace. AETERNA ZENTARIS: Asked Court to Reconsider Class Action Ruling --------------------------------------------------------------- Aeterna Zentaris Inc. said in its Form 20-F Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 30, 2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the Company has filed a motion for reconsideration in a class action ruling. The Company said, "we and certain of our current and former officers are defendants in a purported class-action lawsuit pending in the US District Court for the District of New Jersey (the "Court"), brought on behalf of shareholders of the Company. The lawsuit alleges violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") in connection with allegedly false and misleading statements made by the defendants between April 2, 2012 and November 6, 2014, or the Class Period, regarding the safety and efficacy of Macrilen(TM), a product we developed for use in the diagnosis of AGHD, and the prospects for the approval of the Company's NDA for the product by the FDA. The plaintiffs seek to represent a class comprised of purchasers of our Common Shares during the Class Period and seek damages, costs and expenses and such other relief as determined by the Court." "On September 14, 2015, the Court dismissed the lawsuit stating that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim, but granted the plaintiffs leave to amend. On October 14, 2015, the plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint against us. We filed a motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint on November 11, 2015, because we believe that the Second Amended Complaint also fails to state a claim. The hearing of the motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint occurred on January 19, 2016. "On March 2, 2016, the Court issued an order granting our motion to dismiss the complaint in part and denying it in part. The Court dismissed certain of our current and former officers from the lawsuit. The Court allowed the claim that we omitted material facts from our public statements during the Class Period to proceed against us and our former CEO who departed in 2013, while dismissing such claims against other current and former officers. The Court also allowed a claim for "controlling person" liability to proceed against certain current and former officers. We disagree with the Court's decision and we filed a motion for reconsideration on March 16, 2016. "While we believe we have meritorious defenses and intend to continue to defend this lawsuit vigorously, we cannot predict the outcome. Furthermore, we may, from time to time, be parties to other litigation in the normal course of business. Monitoring and defending against legal actions, whether or not meritorious, is time-consuming for our management and detracts from our ability to fully focus our internal resources on our business activities. In addition, legal fees and costs incurred in connection with such activities may be significant and we could, in the future, be subject to judgments or enter into settlements of claims for significant monetary damages. A decision adverse to our interests could result in the payment of substantial damages and could have a material adverse effect on our cash flow, results of operations and financial position." AL-FLEX EXTERMINATORS: Faces Fla. Lawsuit Over FLSA Violation ------------------------------------------------------------- ALEJANDRO TAMAYO DIAZ, DARIEL FONTELA, NELSON MENDEZ, JOSE REYES, ALBERTO RUIZ, ARIAN RODRIGUEZ, and LUIS VEGA BARROSO, Plaintiffs, vs. AL-FLEX EXTERMINATORS, INC., and ALEXANDER E. NAPOLES, individually, Defendants, Case 1:16-cv-21565-FAM (S.D. Fla., May 2, 2016), alleges violation of the overtime provisions, minimum wage and record keeping provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Al-Flex Exterminators is in the business of pest control. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Domingo C. Rodriguez, Esq. RODRIGUEZ LAW OFFICE, LLC 2121 Ponce de Leon Blvd., Suite 430 Miami, FL 33134 Phone: (305)774-1477 Fax: (305)774-1075 E-mail: domingo@rlomiami.com AMERICAN EAGLE: "Dioum" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages & Meal Breaks ------------------------------------------------------------- Mamadou Dioum, an individual, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. American Eagle Protective Services, Inc.; and, Does 1-50, inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. BC613922 (Cal. Super. Ct., March 15, 2016), seeks to recover unpaid wages, meal period penalties, other penalties, injunctive and other equitable relief, and reasonable attorneys' 2 fees and costs in violation of the Labor Code. According to the complaint, the Defendants allegedly failed to provide all proper meal periods, and timely meal breaks of not less than 30 minutes per five hour work period. The Defendants violated the law by failing to pay wages and/or overtime for all hours worked. American Eagle provides security, facilities maintenance, hospital maintenance, training, and waste disposal services to federal and state government agencies and businesses in the United States. The Plaintiff is represented by: Eric B. Kingsley, Esq. KINGSLEY & KINGSLEY, APC 16133 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1200 Encino, CA 91436 Telephone: (818) 990 8300 Facsimile: (818) 990-2903 E-mail: eric@kingsleykingsley.com AMERICAN HONDA: Order Closing Final Judgment Entered in "Soto" -------------------------------------------------------------- Judge Susan Illston issued an order closing final judgment on the case captioned ALEX SOTO, et al., Plaintiffs, v. AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC., Defendant, Case No. 12-cv-01377-SI (N.D. Cal.). On March 27, 2014, following the March 21, 2014 Final Approval Hearing in the class action settlement, the court issued an Order Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and Application for Attorneys' Fees, and Class Representative Payment, and Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal with Prejudice. The Final Order and Judgment approved the settlement described in the Settlement Agreement. On December 7, 2015, for good cause shown, the court issued a supplemental order granting a Joint Motion by the parties and issued an Order Partially Reopening the Final Judgment for the Sole Purpose of Providing Direct Notice to Settlement Class Members in Washington State to Whom Direct Notice was Inadvertently Not Made. The supplemental order partially reopened the Final Order and Judgment solely as to the omitted class members. After a supplemental hearing held on April 22, 2016, Judge Illston found that the parties and the settlement administrator have fully complied with their respective obligations as set forth in the Supplemental order. A full-text copy of Judge Illston's May 3, 2016 order is available at https://is.gd/mpkYxC from Leagle.com. Alex Soto, Vince Eagen, Plaintiffs, represented by Beth E. Terrell -- bterrell@terrellmarshall.com -- Terrell Marshall Law Group PLLC, Eugene Tompkins -- gtompkins@bm.net -- Berger and Montague, P.C., Matthew Justin Bonness, Berk Law PLLC, Shanon Jude Carson -- scarson@bm.net -- Berger & Montague, P.C., Steven N. Berk, Berk Law PLLC, pro hac vice, Karl Olson -- kolson@rocklawcal.com -- Ram, Olson, Cereghino & Kopczynski LLP, Lawrence Deutsch -- ideutsch@bm.net -- Berger and Montague P.C., pro hac vice & Michael Francis Ram -- mram@rocklawcal.com -- Ram, Olson, Cereghino & Kopczynski LLP. American Honda Motor Co., Inc., Defendant, represented by Michael Lawrence Mallow -- mmallow@sidley.com -- Sidley Austin LLP, Darlene Mi-Hyung Cho -- dcho@sidley.com -- Sidley Austin LLP, Denise A. Smith-Mars, Loeb & Loeb LLP & Michael Brian Shortnacy -- mshortnacy@sidley.com -- Sidley Austin LLP. AMERICAN HONDA: Recalls Off-Highway Vehicles Due to Injury Risk --------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with American Honda Motor Company Inc., of Torrance, Calif., announced a voluntary recall of about 3,300 2016 Honda Pioneer 1000 side-by- side recreational off-highway vehicles. Consumers should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product. The front door can open unexpectedly while the vehicle is in use, posing a risk of injury to occupants. This recall involves model year 2016 Honda Pioneer 1000 side-by- side recreational off-highway vehicles. The ROVs are motorized off-road vehicles with a steering wheel, a gas pedal, a brake pedal, bucket or bench seats, seat belts and an occupant protection structure. The recalled ROVs were sold in three-seat and five-seat models in red, silver or camouflage color. "HONDA" is printed on the front grill and rear tail gate. "Pioneer 1000" is printed on the sides of the vehicle near the tailgate. The model and serial numbers are on a certification label located at the top rear of the left front wheel well. The following model/types and serial number ranges are included in this recall: Model Type Serial Number Range Seats ----- ---- ------------------- ----- M5P A 1HFVE0405G4001087 - 1HFVE0400G4001806 5 M5D A 1HFVE0420G4003427 - 1HFVE0420G4003427 5 M5D A 1HFVE0421G4003470 - 1HFVE0421G4003470 5 M5D A 1HFVE0429G4003488 - HFVE0427G4004087 5 M5D 2A 1HFVE0467G4000723 - 1HFVE0461G4000782 5 M3 A 1HFVE0486G4000665 - 1HFVE0485G4000964 3 M3P A 1HFVE04A7G4002444 - 1HFVE04A6G4003603 3 M5P AC 1HFVE04H6G4000181 - 1HFVE04HXG4000300 5 M3 AC 1HFVE04L4G4000121 - 1HFVE04L9G4000180 3 M3P 2AC 1HFVE04N9G4000181 - 1HFVE04NXG4000240 3 M5D 3A 1HFVE04P1G4000063 - 1HFVE04P1G4000242 5 M5D 3AC 1HFVE04R6G4000061 - 1HFVE04R7G4000120 5 Honda has received one report of an unexpected door-release incident during a dealer set-up of the vehicle. No injuries have been reported. Pictures of the Recalled Products available at: https://is.gd/0iWdCz The recalled products were manufactured in U.S.A and sold at Authorized Honda Powersports dealers nationwide from February 2016 through April 2016 for between $14,000 and $17,200. Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled vehicles and contact their local authorized Honda dealer to schedule an appointment to have the original front door striker plates removed and replaced, free of charge. AMERICAN IN-HOME: Faces "Eutsey" Suit Seeking OT Pay Under FLSA --------------------------------------------------------------- Dradean Eutsey, and those others that are similarly situated, Plaintiff, vs. American In-Home Care, LLC, Defendant, Case 5:16- cv-00310-JA-PRL (M.D. Fla., May 2, 2016), seeks to recover unpaid minimum wages and overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act. American In-Home Care, LLC is an in-home care provider. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeremiah J. Talbott, Esq. Tyler L. Gray, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF JEREMIAH J. TALBOTT, P.A. 900 East Moreno Street Pensacola, FL 32503 Phone: (850) 437-9600 Fax: (850) 437-0906 E-mail: civilfilings@talbottlawfirm.com jj@talbottlawfirm.com APPLIANCE RECYCLING: Defending Gray-Boller Action in Minnesota -------------------------------------------------------------- Appliance Recycling Centers Of America, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 4, 2016, for the fiscal year ended January 2, 2016, that a complaint was filed on November 6, 2015, in the Minnesota District Court for Hennepin County, Minnesota, by David Gray and Michael Boller, purporting to bring suit derivatively on behalf of the Company against twelve current and former officers and directors of the Company. The complaint alleges that the defendants breached their fiduciary duties based on substantially similar allegations to those asserted in Mr. Feola's putative securities class action complaint, and that the defendants have been unjustly enriched as a result thereof. The complaint seeks damages, disgorgement, an award of attorneys' fees and other expenses, and an order compelling changes to the Company's corporate governance and internal procedures. This matter has been stayed by the court, pursuant to a stipulation of the parties, until the United States District Court for the Central District of California determines the legal sufficiency of Jason Feola's complaint or other specified developments occur in that case. "This matter has been submitted to our insurance carriers," the Company said. APPLIANCE RECYCLING: "Feola" Class Action Forwarded to Insurance ---------------------------------------------------------------- Appliance Recycling Centers Of America, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 4, 2016, for the fiscal year ended January 2, 2016, that the case by Jason Feola has been forwarded to its insurance carriers. On March 6, 2015, a complaint was filed in United States District Court for the Central District of California by Jason Feola, individually and as a representative of a putative class consisting of purchasers of the Company's common stock between March 15, 2012 and February 11, 2015, against Appliance Recycling Centers of America, Inc. and certain current and former officers of the Company. Mr. Feola, pursuant to terms of his retainer agreement with The Rosen Law Firm, certified that he purchased 240 shares of the Company's common stock for $984 in total consideration. On May 7, 2015, the Company and the individual defendants were served the complaint. In July 2015, the Company and the individual defendants received an amended complaint. The complaint alleges that misstatements and omissions occurred in press releases and filings by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission and that these misstatements or omissions constitute violations of Section 20 (a) and Section 10(b) of, and Rule 10b-5 under, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. In October 2015, the court held a hearing on the Company's motion to dismiss the complaint. On November 24, 2015, the United States District Court for the Central District of California entered an order granting the motion to dismiss the amended complaint. The Court's order provided that the dismissal was without prejudice and that the plaintiffs could file an amended complaint within 21 days of the issuance of the order. On December 15, 2015, the Company and the individual defendants were served with a second amended complaint. In January 2016, we filed a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint and expect a court hearing on the motion to dismiss to be held in May 2016. This matter has been forwarded to our insurance carriers and we intend to contest vigorously the claims made in the complaint. ARCHER WELL: Stanley Seeks Class Certification for MWD Workers -------------------------------------------------------------- The Plaintiff in the lawsuit titled MICHAEL STANLEY, on Behalf of Himself and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. ARCHER WELL COMPANY INC. and GREAT WHITE PRESSURE CONTROL LLC, Case No. 4:16-cv-00370 (S.D. Tex.), files a motion for conditional certification asking the Court to issue an approved notice to a class of "similarly situated" aggrieved employees. Mr. Stanley filed this proposed collective action lawsuit under the Fair Labor Standards Act seeking to recover unpaid wages that were wrongfully denied to him and a class of similarly situated "measurement while drilling" workers. This case involves the misclassification of the MWD position as exempt from overtime. He alleges that these workers regularly worked over 40 hours each week but never received additional compensation for their overtime hours. A copy of the Motion is available at no charge at http://d.classactionreporternewsletter.com/u?f=LmbFoABW The Plaintiff is represented by: Don J. Foty, Esq. KENNEDY HODGES, LLP 711 W. Alabama St. Houston, TX 77006 Telephone: 713-523-0001 Facsimile: 713-523-1116 E-mail: dfoty@kennedyhodges.com AT&T MOBILITY: Faces "Sandoval" Suit in Cal. Over Unpaid Wages -------------------------------------------------------------- Karla Sandoval, Fernando Felix, Mariana Vasquez, Valerie Calderon, and Ariana Moreno, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. AT&T Mobility Services, LLC, AT&T Services, Inc., and Pacific Bell Telephone Company, Case No. RG16814598 (Cal. Super. Ct., May 5, 2016), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay wages earned and owed, in the form of vested unused vacation time accrued by employees. The Defendants are in the business of providing wireless voice and data communications services and products to individual, business, and government users in the United States. The Plaintiff is represented by: David Yeremian, Esq. DAVID YEREMIAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. 535 N. Brand Blvd., Suite 705 3 Glendale, CA 91203 Telephone: (818) 230-8380 Facsimile: (818) 230-0308 E-mail: david@yeremianlaw.com - and - Emil Davtyan, Esq. DAVTYAN PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION 21900 Burbank Blvd., Suite 300 7 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Telephone: (818) 992-2935 Facsimile: (818) 975~5525 E-mail: emil@davtyanlaw.com AUTO DREAMS: "Ramirez" Class Suit Removed to Dist. New Jersey ------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit styled Silvia Ramirez, individually and on behalf of those similarly situated v. Auto Dreams USA, Credit Acceptance Corporation, Benjamin Frenkel, and John Does 1-10, Case No. OCN-L-16-00684, was removed from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Ocean County to the U.S. District Court District of New Jersey (Trenton). The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:16- cv-02549-FLW-LHG to the proceeding. Auto Dreams USA operates a used car dealership company at 1182 Ocean Ave, Lakewood Township, NJ 08701. Credit Acceptance Corporation operates an auto finance company providing automobile loans and other related financial products. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jonathan Rudnick, Esq. CARTON & RUDNICK 788 Shrewsbury Ave, Suite 204 Tinton Falls, NJ 07724 Telephone: (732) 842-2070 Facsimile: (732) 879-0213 E-mail: jonr@cartonandrudnick.com The Defendant is represented by: Andrew Muscato, Esq. SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM, LLP Four Times Square New York, NY 10036-6522 Telephone: (212) 735-3000 Facsimile: (212) 735-2000 E-mail: amuscato@skadden.com AVANGRID INC: Certification of Shareholder Class Sought ------------------------------------------------------- Avangrid, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 1, 2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit have agreed to petition the court to (1) certify the shareholder class, (2) approve the terms of the settlement, (3) decide the amount of attorneys' fees to be awarded to plaintiffs' counsel, and (4) dismiss the consolidated action. The Company said, "On February 27, 2015, a complaint was filed in Connecticut state court against us, UIL, its board of directors and others related to our acquisition of UIL. The complaint is a class action filed on behalf of all UIL shareowners. The complaint includes two counts: (a) that the UIL directors breached their fiduciary duties by failing to engage in an appropriate process and failing to get a fair price; and (b) we aided and abetted that breach by rendering "substantial assistance" to the UIL directors. Subsequently, four other similar complaints were filed in Connecticut. The cases have been consolidated and transferred to the complex litigation court and the time to respond to the complaint has been extended by mutual agreement." "On October 2, 2015, the plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint in the Superior Court for the Judicial District of Stamford/Norwalk, Complex Litigation Docket. The consolidated amended complaint generally alleges that UIL's directors breached their fiduciary duties by failing to maximize shareowner value in negotiating and approving the acquisition, and that we, UIL, and/or Morgan Stanley aided and abetted the UIL Board's alleged breaches. "On November 30, 2015, the plaintiffs and the defendants executed a binding Memorandum of Understanding, or MOU, that sets forth the terms on which the parties have agreed to settle the consolidated action. The settlement terms do not include any change in the acquisition consideration but only additional disclosures relating to information included in our Registration Statement on Form S-4 filed with the SEC, which was declared effective on November 12, 2015. Under the terms of the MOU, the defendants allowed the plaintiffs to conduct some additional confirmatory discovery, which was completed in February 2016, and agreed to negotiate in good faith in an effort to agree upon reasonable plaintiffs' counsel fees, but in any event to pay the plaintiffs' counsel fees as determined by the court. "The plaintiffs agreed to petition the court to (1) certify the shareholder class, (2) approve the terms of the settlement, (3) decide the amount of attorneys' fees to be awarded to plaintiffs' counsel, and (4) dismiss the consolidated action." AVANGRID, Inc., or AVANGRID, formerly Iberdrola USA, Inc., is a New York corporation headquartered in New Gloucester, Maine. The Company is a direct, majority owned subsidiary of Iberdrola, S.A., a corporation (sociedad anonima) organized under the laws of Spain, one of the world's leading energy companies. BANAMEX USA: "Blatt" Class Suit Voluntarily Dismissed ----------------------------------------------------- The Clerk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois made a docket entry on May 10, 2016, in the case captioned Robert Blatt v. Banamex USA, Case No.: 1:15-cv-11876 (N.D. Ill.), relating to a hearing held before the Honorable Robert W. Gettleman. The minute entry states that the action is voluntarily dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, with each party to bear its own costs, fees and expenses. The scheduled status hearing is stricken and the civil case is terminated. A copy of the Notification of Docket Entry is available at no charge at http://d.classactionreporternewsletter.com/u?f=lSvJqdcC BANK OF AMERICA: "Naranjo" Class Action Settlement Has Final Okay ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the case captioned MICHELLE NARANJO, et al., Plaintiffs, v. BANK OF AMERICA NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Defendant, Case No. 14-CV- 02748-LHK (N.D. Cal.), Judge Lucy H. Koh granted the plaintiffs' motions for attorney's fees and class representative award and for final approval of their class action settlement. Judge Koh approved these payments in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreement: -- payment of class representative awards to Michelle Naranjo in the amount of $2,500.00 and Mathan Jayme in the amount of $2,500.00; -- payment to Michelle Naranjo in the amount of $2,500.00 and Mathan Jayme in the amount of $2,500.00 to settle their individual claims; -- payment of attorney's fees in the amount of $63,750.00 and costs in the amount of $4,470.87 to class counsel; -- payment of fees by the defendants to the claims administrator in the amount of $20,000.00; and -- payment of $46,875.00 to the California Labor Workforce & Development Agency as required under California law for settlement of penalties under the Private Attorney General Act. A full-text copy of Judge Koh's May 5, 2016 order is available at https://is.gd/WS8a5y from Leagle.com. Michelle Naranjo, Mathan Jayme, Plaintiffs, represented by William Lucas Marder -- bill@polarislawgroup.com -- Polaris Law Group, LLP, Dennis Sangwon Hyun, Hyun Legal & Larry W Lee, Diversity Law Group, P.C.. Bank of America National Association, Defendant, represented by John Arthur Van Hook -- jvanhook@mcguirewoods.com -- McGuire Woods LLP & Michael David Mandel -- mmandel@mcguirewoods.com -- McGuireWoods LLP. BEDNEST LTD: Recalls Bedside Sleepers Due to Fall Hazard -------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with Bednest Ltd., of UK, announced a voluntary recall of about 500 Bedside Sleepers. Consumers should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product. The bedside sleepers fail to meet mandatory federal requirements for these products, posing a fall hazard to babies. This recall involves Bednest bedside infant sleepers manufactured after July 2014. The date of manufacture is stamped underneath the base of the bedside sleepers. The Bednest has beech wood ends with white fabric sides over metal frames on a beech wood height- adjustable stand. The bedside sleeper measures about 34 inches long by 18.5 inches wide. There are sewn-in Bednest labels on the fabric side panel and on the upper surface of the mattress. No consumer incidents have been reported. Pictures of the Recalled Products available at: https://is.gd/AUVmci The recalled products were manufactured in Romania and sold Online at www.Bednest.com from March 2010 through December 2015 for between $400 and $500 or if rented between $170 and $200. Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled bedside sleeper while the sides are in the fully open position. Bednest is providing a free repair kit that will permanently lock the side rail into place. The firm is contacting all known consumers directly. It is estimated that the repair kits will be sent out by June 15, 2016. BELTLINE ROAD: Sued in S.D. Fla. Over Lender-Placed Insurance ------------------------------------------------------------- April Thelwell, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Beltline Road Insurance Agency Inc. f/k/a Ahmsi Insurance Agency, Inc., David M. Friedman, Homeward Residential, Inc. f/k/a American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc., QBE Financial Institution Risk Services Inc. f/k/a Sterling National Corporation f/k/a ZC Sterling Corporation, QBE First Insurance Agency, Inc. f/k/a ZC Sterling Insurance Agency, Inc., QBE Insurance Corporation, QBE Specialty Insurance Company, WL Ross & Co., LLC, WLR AHM Co-Invest, L.P., WLR/GS Master Coinvestment, L.P., WLR Recovery Fund II, L.P., WLR Recovery Fund IV, L.P., and WLR IV Parallel ESC, L.P., and ZCS Investments LLC, the Defendants, Case No. 1:16-cv-20942-JLK (S.D. Fla., March 15, 2016), seeks full disgorgement and restitution of the Defendants' enrichment, benefits, and ill-gotten gains acquired as a result of the alleged unlawful or wrongful conduct relating to lender-placed insurance (LPI) pursuant to the Corrupt Organizations Act. According to the complaint, the Defendants allegedly perpetrated a scheme to overstate Homeward's lender-placed insurance (LPI) costs, and, thereby, to overcharge borrowers for indemnification. Beltline Road provides insurance services. The Plaintiff is represented by: Herman J. Russomanno, Esq. Robert J. Borrello, Esq. Herman J. Russomanno III, Esq. RUSSOMANNO & BORRELLO, P.A. Museum Tower - Penthouse 2800 150 West Flagler Street Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 373 2101 Facsimile: (305) 373 2103 E-mail: hrussomanno@russomanno.com rborrello@russomanno.com herman2@russomanno.com BEST BM: "Rodriguez" Suit Seeks Earned Wages Under FLSA ------------------------------------------------------- Ricardo Rodriguez, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Best BM Food Corp., P.E.N.O Food Corp., Francisco Diaz, and Mayer Hirsch, the Defendants, Case No. 1:16-cv-01924-JMF (S.D.N.Y., March 15, 2016), seeks to remedy violations of the wage-and-hour provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the New York Labor Law by Defendants that have deprived Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees of their lawfully earned wages. According to the complaint, the Defendants have not paid the Plaintiff the proper overtime compensation for all hours in excess of 40 hours that he has been suffered or permitted to work each workweek. Best BM owns and operates Fine Fare/Pioneer supermarket. The Plaintiff is represented by: Brian S. Schaffer, Esq. Arsenio D. Rodriguez, Esq. FITAPELLI & SCHAFFER, LLP 28 Liberty Street New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 300 0375 E-mail: arodriguez@fslawfirm.com BHH LLC: Court Narrows Claims in "Hart" Suit -------------------------------------------- In the case captioned JOANNE HART, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. BHH, LLC d/b/a BELL + HOWELL, et al. Defendants, No. 15cv4804 (S.D.N.Y.), Judge William H. Pauley, III granted in part and denied, in part, the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Joanne Hart brought a putative consumer class action against BHH LLC and Van Hauser LLC alleging claims under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, Californian Consumers Legal Remedies Act, California Unfair Competition Law, and California False Advertising Law, as well as claims for breach of express warranty and unjust enrichment. Judge Pauley granted the defendants' motion to dismiss with respect to Hart's Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act claim and unjust enrichment claim. Hart's claims concerning Bell & Howell Solar Animal Repellers were also dismissed for lack of standing. A full-text copy of Judge Pauley's May 5, 2016 memorandum and order is available at https://is.gd/QZXow1 from Leagle.com. Joanne Hart, Plaintiff, represented by Yitzchak Kopel -- ykopel@bursor.com -- Bursor & Fisher, P.A. & Joseph Ignatius Marchese -- jmarchese@bursor.com -- Bursor & Fisher, P.A.. BHH LLC, Van Hauser LLC, Defendants, represented by Howard B. Randell -- hbr@lefltd.com -- Leahy, Eisenberg & Franenkel, Ltd., pro hac vice & Scott Wing -- sw@lefltd.com -- Leahy, Eisenberg & Franenkel, Ltd., pro hac vice. BHP BILLITON: Artificially Inflated ADRs, "Katz" Suit Alleges ------------------------------------------------------------- Gary Katz, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. BHP Billiton Limited, BHP Billiton PLC, Jac Nasser, Andrew Mackenzie, Peter Beaven and Graham Kerr, the Defendants, Case No. 1:16-cv-01920 (S.D.N.Y., March 15, 2016), seeks to pursue remedies against the Defendants, pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. According to the complaint, the Defendants allegedly made false and misleading statements and engaged in a scheme to deceive the market and a course of conduct that artificially inflated the price of the American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) and operated as a fraud or deceit on ADR purchasers by misrepresenting the value of the Company's business and prospects. As Defendants' misrepresentations and fraudulent conduct became apparent to the market, the price of the ADRs declined, as the artificial inflation came out of the price. As a result of their ADR purchases, Plaintiff and other members of the Class suffered economic loss, i.e., damages, under the federal securities laws. BHP is a global resources company producing major commodities, including iron ore, metallurgical and energy coal, conventional and unconventional oil and gas, copper, aluminum, manganese, uranium, nickel and silver. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq. J. Alexander Hood II, Esq. Marc Gorrie, Esq. Patrick V. Dahlstrom, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP 600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 661 1100 Facsimile: (212) 661 8665 Email: jalieberman@pomlaw.com ahood@pomlaw.com mgorrie@pomlaw.com pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com - and - Peretz Bronstein, Esq. BRONSTEIN, GEWIRTZ & GROSSMAN, LLC 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4600 New York, NY 10165 Telephone: (212) 697 6484 Facsimile: (212) 697 7296 E-mail: peretz@bgandg.com BIG LOTS: Securities Action Entering Early Stages of Discovery -------------------------------------------------------------- Big Lots, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that a securities class action lawsuit is entering the early stages of discovery. The Company said, "On July 9, 2012, a putative securities class action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio on behalf of persons who acquired our common shares between February 2, 2012 and April 23, 2012. This lawsuit was filed against us, Lisa Bachmann, Mr. Cooper, Mr. Fishman and Mr. Haubiel. The complaint in the putative class action generally alleges that the defendants made statements concerning our financial performance that were false or misleading. The complaint asserts claims under sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 and seeks damages in an unspecified amount, plus attorneys' fees and expenses. The lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint on April 4, 2013, which added Mr. Johnson as a defendant, removed Ms. Bachmann as a defendant, and extended the putative class period to August 23, 2012. On May 6, 2013, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the putative class action complaint. On January 21, 2016, the Court granted in part and denied in part the defendants' motion to dismiss, allowing some claims to move forward. The case is entering the early stages of discovery." Big Lots, Inc. is a unique, non-traditional, discount retailer operating in the United States of America. BLOOMIN' BRANDS: Sued in S.D. Tex. Over Gender Discrimination ------------------------------------------------------------- Mike O. Salazar, an Individual, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Bloomin' Brands, Inc.; OSI Restaurant Partners, LLC; Outback Steakhouse of Florida, LLC; and OS Restaurant Services, LLC, f/k/a OS Restaurant Services, Inc. (all doing business as Outback Steakhouse No. 4425), the Defendants, Case No. 2:16-cv-00581-RFB-NJK (S.D. Tex., March 15, 2016), seeks redress for gender discrimination created by Defendants' fatally flawed implementation of a federal Consent Decree entered in 2009 to create gender-neutral workplace in all Outback Steakhouse restaurants across the country. According to the complaint, rather than implement the Consent Decree in a gender-neutral way, Defendants preferentially promoted less qualified women. Defendants then retaliated against Salazar by firing him when he complained about the discrimination. Salazar is entitled to be reinstated and compensated for the denial of promotion opportunities and the loss of his job. Bloomin' Brands is a hospitality industry company that owns several American casual dining restaurant chains. The Plaintiff is represented by: Mynor "Eddie" Rodriguez, Esq. Michael Prejean, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF MYNOR E. RODRIGUEZ P.C. 4265 San Felipe, Suite 1100 Houston, TX 77027 Telephone: (713) 968 9828 Facsimile: (832) 553 7420 E-mail: mrodriguez@rodrigueztrialfirm.com BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM: Faces "Christie" Suit Over Pradaxa(R) Drugs ----------------------------------------------------------------- Gwendolyn Elizabeth Christie v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Boehringer Ingelheim International GMBH, Case No. HHD-CV-16-6067916-S (Conn. Super. Ct., May 2, 2016), is an action for damages suffered by the Plaintiff as a proximate result of the Defendant's alleged negligent and wrongful conduct in connection with the design, testing, and labeling, of Pradaxa(R). Pradaxa (R) is a direct thrombin inhibitor that is indicated to reduce the risk of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. The Defendants operate a pharmaceutical company with its principal place of business at 900 Ridgebury Road, Ridgefield, Connecticut 06877. The Plaintiff is represented by: Neal L. Moskow, Esq. URY & MOSKOW, LLC 833 Black Rock Turnpike Fairfield, CT 06825 Telephone: (203) 610-6393 Facsimile: (203) 610-6399 E-mail: neal@urymoskow.com - and - Russell T. Abney, Esq. FERRER, POIROT WANSBROUGH FELLER DANIEL ABNEY & LINVILLE 2100 RiverEdge Parkway, Suite 720 Atlanta, GA 30328 Telephone: (800) 521-4492 Facsimile: (214) 526-6026 E-mail: rabney@lawyerworks.com BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM: Faces "Manlove" Suit Over Pradaxa(R) Drugs ---------------------------------------------------------------- Patricia Delle Manlove v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Boehringer Ingelheim International GMBH, Case No. HHD- CV-16-6067915-S (Conn. Super. Ct., May 2, 2015), is an action for damages suffered by the Plaintiff as a proximate result of the Defendant's alleged negligent and wrongful conduct in connection with the design, testing, and labeling, of Pradaxa(R). Pradaxa (R) is a direct thrombin inhibitor that is indicated to reduce the risk of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. The Defendants operate a pharmaceutical company with its principal place of business at 900 Ridgebury Road, Ridgefield, Connecticut 06877. The Plaintiff is represented by: Neal L. Moskow, Esq. URY & MOSKOW, LLC 833 Black Rock Turnpike Fairfield, CT 06825 Telephone: (203) 610-6393 Facsimile: (203) 610-6399 E-mail: neal@urymoskow.com - and - Russell T. Abney, Esq. FERRER, POIROT WANSBROUGH FELLER DANIEL ABNEY & LINVILLE 2100 River Edge Parkway, Suite 720 Atlanta, GA 30328 Telephone: (800) 521-4492 Facsimile: (214) 526-6026 E-mail: rabney@lawyerworks.com BRAND SCAFFOLD: Faces "Thomas" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime ---------------------------------------------------------------- Maurice Leonard Thomas, an individually and on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. Brand Scaffold Services, Inc., and Does 1 to 50, inclusive, Case No. BC619547 (Cal. Super. Ct., May 5, 2016), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the California Labor Code. Brand Scaffold Services, Inc. provides scaffolding services primarily to refining, chemical, petrochemical, utility, and pulp and paper industries. The Plaintiff is represented by: Eric B. Kingsley, Esq., Esq. Kelsey M. Szamet, Esq., Esq. KINGSLEY &KINGSLEY, APC 16133 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1200 Encino, CA 91436 Telephone: (818) 990-8300 Facsimile: (818) 990-2903 E-mail: eric@kingsleykingsley.com kelsey@kingsleykingsley.com - and - Walter L. Haines, Esq. UNITED EMPLOYERS LAWGROUP, PC 5500 Bolsa Avenue, Suite201 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 Telephone: (562) 256-1047 Facsimile: (562) 256-1006 E-mail: admin@uelglaw.com BRIM'S FOOD: "Scott" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages Under FLSA ------------------------------------------------------- Ronnie Scott, and other similarly situated individuals, the Plaintiff, v. Brim's Food, Inc., a Florida Profit Corporation, d/b/a Royal Castle, Josephine Malt Brimberry, individually, and James N. Brimberry, individually, the Defendants, Case No. 2016- 006439-CA-01(Fla. Cir. Ct., March 15, 2016), seeks to recover damages exceeding $15,000 excluding attorneys' fees or costs for unpaid wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). According to the complaint, the Plaintiff has been working for Defendants as non-exempt employee since 2002. Throughout Plaintiff's employment, Plaintiff worked in excess of 40 hours per week. The Plaintiff was not paid at the proper overtime rate hours worked in excess of 40 hours. Brim's Food is a restaurant located in Miami, Florida. The Plaintiff is represented by: Anthony M. Georges-Pierre, Esq. REMER & GEORGES-PIERRE, PLLC Court House Tower 44 West Flagler Street, Suite 2200 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 416 5000 Facsimile: (305) 416 5005 E-mail: agp@rgpattomeys.com apetisco@rgpattorncvs.com rrcguciro@mpattorneys.com pn@rgpattorneys.com BROOKLYN EVENTS: Sued in E.D.N.Y. Over Sexual Harassment -------------------------------------------------------- Steven Suchowieski, Rebecca-Emma Kaplan, Darrin Morda, Thomas Beaulieu, James Barnes, Oliver Correa, Leslie Cuc, Ari Fraser, Vanessa Lowe, Rosa Milazzo, Erika Mugglin, Catherine Papamanousakis, Ryan Pilger, Sarah Pribis, Miles Ewell, and Luis Cardozo, on behalf of themselves and on behalf of all other similarly situated persons, the Plaintiffs, v. Brooklyn Events LLC, doing business as Verboten, Verboten Corporation, Jen Schiffer, and John Perez, the Defendants, Case No. 1:16-cv-01295 (E.D.N.Y., March 15, 2016), seeks punitive damages in connection with Defendants' discriminatory conduct and aiding and abetting discriminatory conduct, and seeks to recover minimum wages and premium overtime compensation, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). According to the complaints, Defendants' female employees are subjected to persistent sexual harassment at the hands of Ms. Schiffer. By way of example only, Ms. Schiffer regularly and openly discusses her sex life, including her favorite sexual positions and sexual encounters with her husband John Perez and other women. Ms. Schiffer has also attempted pressure female employees into engaging in sexual conduct with her and other males, including her boyfriend, Verboten employee Dylan Schwartz. Defendants are also allegedly engaged in numerous unlawful wage practices that have resulted in substantial damage to Plaintiffs Plaintiff -- important info and story related to the case The Defendants operate nightclub business. The Plaintiffs are represented by: David Evan Gottlieb, Esq. Michael John Willemin, Esq. WIGDOR LLP 85 Fifth Avenue, Fifth Floor New York, NY 10003 Telephone: (212) 257 6800 Facsimile: (212) 257 6845 E-mail: dgottlieb@wigdorlaw.com mwillemin@wigdorlaw.com BRP US: Recalls Side-by-Side Off-Road Vehicles Due to Crash Risk ---------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with BRP U.S. Inc. of Sturtevant, Wis., announced a voluntary recall of about 10,600 Side-by-side off-road vehicles. Consumers should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product. The steering coupling can strip on the rack and pinion assembly and result in a loss of steering control and crash hazard. This recall involves model year 2013 Can-Am Commander side-by-side vehicles equipped with Dynamic Power Steering (DPS). The vehicles came in various colors. The model name and Vehicle Identification Number (VIN) is on a label under the glove box. To find a list of VINs for recalled vehicles, go to www.can-am.brp.com and click on "Owner Center" and then "Recall Information." Recalled models include: COMMANDER DPS 1000EFI COMMANDER DPS 800REFI COMMANDER LTD 1000EFI COMMANDER X 1000EFI COMMANDER XT 1000EFI COMMANDER XT XT 800REFI The firm has received 29 incident reports, including two reports of minor injuries. Pictures of the Recalled Products available at: https://is.gd/oCV9Pt The recalled products were manufactured in Mexico and sold at Can- Am dealers nationwide from April 2012 through April 2016 for between $12,600 and $20,100. Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled vehicles and contact BRP Can-Am side-by-side dealer to schedule an appointment for a vehicle inspection and free repair. The free repair will be available on June 30, 2016. In the meantime, consumers who must use their vehicles can contact BRP Can-Am side-by-side dealer and make an appointment to have their vehicles verified. This free verification is a temporary action to allow limited use of the vehicles until the availability of the free repair. BRP is notifying registered consumers directly about this recall. BUCKS COUNTY, PA: Bid for Class Cert. of "Baha" Suit Granted ------------------------------------------------------------ In the case captioned DARYOUSH TAHA, Plaintiff, v. BUCKS COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA, BUCKS COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, and UNPUBLISH LLC, Defendants. UNPUBLISH LLC Cross Defendant. BENSALEM TOWNSHIP Cross Claimant v. BUCKS COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY RECORDS/ RECORDS CUSTODIAN EMPLOYEES JANE AND/OR JOHN DOE #1-6, BUCKS COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA, TERRANCE P. MOORE, FRANK NOONAN and WILLIAM F. PLANTIER Cross Defendants, Civil Action No. 12-6867 (E.D. Pa.), Judge Wendy Beetlestone granted Daryoush Taha's motion for class certification pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and (b). Taha sought to be the lead plaintiff in a class action suit brought pursuant to the Pennsylvania Criminal History Record Information Act (CHRIA). Taha alleged that Bucks County and Bucks County Correctional Facility published the arrest records of thousands of individuals on a public electronic search tool in violation of the anti-dissemination provisions of CHRIA. Summary judgment has already been granted in Taha's favor as to the county defendants' liability. Taha moved for class certification. Judge Beetlestone found that Taha has satisfied the demands of Rule 23(a) in demonstrating numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy. The judge also found that Taha has met the requirements of Rule 23(b)(3) by demonstrating that questions common to the class predominate over those affecting individual members and that a class action suit is superior to other available methods for fairly and efficiently adjudicating the controversy. A full-text copy of Judge Beetlestone's May 5, 2016 order is available at https://is.gd/Gs37Mh from Leagle.com. DARYOUSH TAHA, Plaintiff, represented by ALAN E. DENENBERG, ABRAMSON & DENENBERG, JONATHAN SHUB -- jshub@kohnswift.com -- KOHN SWIFT & GRAF PC & SCOTT A. GEORGE -- sgeorge@seegerweiss.com -- SEEGER WEISS. BUCKS COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA, BUCKS COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, Defendants, represented by FRANK A. CHERNAK -- chernakf@ballardspahr.com -- BALLARD SPAHR ANDREWS & INGERSOLL LLP, BURT M. RUBLIN -- rublin@ballardspahr.com -- BALLARD SPAHR ANDREWS & INGERSOLL, LLP & ERIN K. CLARKE -- clarkee@ballardspahr.com -- Ballard Spahr LLP. BENSALEM TOWNSHIP, Cross Claimant, represented by KATHRYN A. DUX - - duxk@ggmfirm.com -- GERMAN GALLAGHER & MURTAGH. BUCKS COUNTY PENNSYLVANIA, TERRANCE P. MOORE, WILLIAM F. PLAINTIER, Cross Defendants, represented by ERIN K. CLARKE, Ballard Spahr LLP. FRANK NOONAN, Cross Defendant, represented by BARRY N. KRAMER, PA OFFICE OF ATTY GENERAL. C&J ENERGY: Conditional Class Cert. of "Esparza" Suit Affirmed -------------------------------------------------------------- Judge David A. Ezra affirmed the Magistrate Judge's order granting conditional class certification in the case captioned JACOB ESPARZA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. C&J ENERGY SERVICES, INC. and C&J SPEC- RENT SERVICES, INC. Defendants, No. 5:15-CV-850-DAE (W.D. Tex.). C&J Energy Services, Inc. and C&J Spec-Rent Services, Inc. filed a motion to reconsider Magistrate Judge Henry Bemporad's April 1, 2016 decision granting conditional class certification, and authorizing that notice be sent to "all current and former wireline engineers . . . paid on a salaried basis during the last three years." Denying the defendants' motion, Judge Ezra held that the defendants are obligated to provide the plaintiff with contact information for all wireline engineers in accordance with the instructions set forth in Judge Bemporad's order. The temporary stay imposed during the pendency of the court's determination of the defendants' motion was also lifted. A full-text copy of Judge Ezra's May 2, 2016 order is available at https://is.gd/FNmscs from Leagle.com. The plaintiff, Jacob Esparza, was employed at C&J as part of a wireline crew at well sites in Texas and New Mexico between April 2010 and May 2014. He alleged that he was regularly scheduled to work in excess of 40 hours per week, but was not paid overtime wages in accordance with the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and the New Mexico Minimum Wage Act ("NMMWA"). On September 30, 2015, Esparza filed suit against C&J under the FLSA and NMMWA on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated employees to recover unpaid overtime compensation. On January 14, 2016, Esparza amended his complaint to add Spec-Rent as a defendant. Jacob Esparza, Jess Peper, Kelly B. Bowman, John W. Soules, III, Plaintiffs, represented by Andrew W. Dunlap, Fibich, Leebron, Copeland, Briggs & Josephson, Jessica Marie Bresler, Fibich Leebron Copeland Briggs & Josephson, Lindsay R. Itkin, Fibich Leebron Copeland Briggs & Josephson, Richard J. Burch, Bruckner Burch PLLC & Michael A. Josephson, Fibich, Leebron, Copeland, Briggs & Josephson. C&J Energy Services, Inc., Defendant, represented by Sean Michael Becker -- sbecker@velaw.com -- Vinson & Elkins & Christie M. Alcala -- calcala@velaw.com -- Vinson & Elkins, L.L.P.. CALERES INC: Settlement Payments Made in 2015 Fourth Quarter ------------------------------------------------------------ Caleres, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2016, for the fiscal year ended January 30, 2016, that "During 2014, we signed a settlement agreement to resolve a putative class action lawsuit involving wage and hour claims in California for an amount not to exceed $1.5 million. In 2015, the court granted final approval of the settlement, pursuant to which the Company was required to pay $1.0 million in attorneys' fees, costs of administering the settlement and settlement payments to class members who submitted claims. All payments required under the settlement agreement were made in the fourth quarter of 2015 and this matter is fully resolved." Caleres, Inc., originally founded as Brown Shoe Company, Inc. in 1878 and incorporated in 1913, is a global footwear retailer and wholesaler with annual net sales of $2.6 billion. CARIBOU COFFEE: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, "Farnham" Suit Claims ----------------------------------------------------------------- Kristie Farnham, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Caribou Coffee Company, Case No. 3:16-cv- 00295 (W.D. Wis., May 5, 2016), seeks to stop the Defendant's practice of making unsolicited calls. Caribou Coffee Company is a specialty coffee and espresso retailer. The Plaintiff is represented by: Frank Hedin, Esq. CAREY RODRIGUEZ MILIAN GONYA, LLP 1395 Brickell Ave, Suite 700 Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (305) 372-7474 E-mail: fhedin@careyrodriguez.com CASTLIGHT HEALTH: Parties Reached Mediated Cash Settlement ---------------------------------------------------------- Castlight Health, Inc. said in its Form 8-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 1, 2016, that on March 28, 2016, the parties to the consolidated class action lawsuit against the Company and certain of the Company's current and former directors and executive officers, significant stockholders and underwriters of its initial public offering reached a mutually acceptable resolution by way of a mediated cash settlement. The aggregate amount of the settlement under the agreement in principle is $9.5 million. Of the total cash to be provided in the settlement, the agreement in principle calls for the Company to contribute $800,000, with the remainder to be covered by the Company's D&O insurance. In that regard, the Company intends to pay the balance of its self-insured retention, or deductible portion under its insurance policy, during the quarter ended June 30, 2016. The estimated amount remaining to be paid on the self- insured retention is approximately $1.9 million. While the Company believes it has meritorious defenses to the litigation, the Company is satisfied with this resolution given the risks and expenses associated with further litigation. The settlement is subject to final documentation and court approval. CEC ENTERTAINMENT: "Ford" Settlement Administration Dates Changed ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the case captioned FRANCHESCA FORD, individually, and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. CEC ENTERTAINMENT, INC., a Kansas corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 3:14-cv-01420- RS (N.D. Cal.), Judge Richard Seeborg approved a modified schedule for settlement administration based on the parties' stipulation. The modified schedule is as follows: May 13, 2016 -- Last day for the Settlement Administrator to mail the Class Notice to all Class Members. June 28, 2016 -- Last day for Plaintiff to file the Motion for Attorneys' Fees, Costs, and a Class Representative Enhancement Payment. July 12, 2016 -- Last day for Class Members to submit Requests for Exclusion or objections to the Settlement. July 19, 2016 -- Last day for Plaintiff to file the Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement. August 11, 2016 at 1:30 p.m. -- Hearing on Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and Motion for Attorneys' Fees, Costs, and a Class Representative Enhancement Payment. A full-text copy of Judge Seeborg's May 5, 2016 order is available at https://is.gd/Ip8qg6 from Leagle.com. Francesca Ford, Plaintiff, represented by Katherine Ward Kehr -- katherine.kehr@capstonelawyers.com -- Capstone Law APC, Matthew Thomas Theriault -- matthew.theriault@capstonelawyers.com -- Capstone Law APC, Robert Joseph Drexler, Jr. -- robert.drexler@capstonelawyers.com -- Capstone Law APC, Jonathan Sing Lee -- jonathan.lee@capstonelawyers.com -- Capstone Law APC, Liana Carol Carter -- liana.carter@capstonelawyers.com -- Capstone Law APC & Stan Karas -- stan.karas@capstonelawyers.com -- Capstone Law APC. CEC Entertainment, Inc., Defendant, represented by Christopher Kenneth Petersen -- cpetersen@akingump.com -- Akin Gump Strauss Hauer Feld, Julia Ingrid DeBeers, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer and Feld, Liz Kathryn Bertko -- lbertko@akingump.com -- Akin Gump Strauss Hauer and Feld LLP & Donna Marie Mezias -- dmezias@akingump.com -- Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. Richard Sinohui, Objector, represented by Trush Merrick James, Trush Law Office, APC. CHEMOIL ENERGY: Faces "Valdez" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime ---------------------------------------------------------------- Manuel Valdez and Rafael Valdez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Chemoil Energy, Inc., Case No. 5:16- cv-00419 (W.D. Tex., May 5, 2016), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Chemoil Energy, Inc. is one of the world's leading retail energy companies in sea and land sectors, delivering energy to an extensive network of international clients. The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert R. Debes Jr., Esq. Ricardo J. Prieto, Esq. SHELLIST LAZARZ SLOBIN LLP 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1515 Houston, TX 77046 Telephone: (713) 621-2277 Facsimile: (713) 621-0993 E-mail: bdebes@eeoc.net rprieto@eeoc.net CHICAGO TRANSIT: Illinois Rules on "Matthews" Appeal ---------------------------------------------------- The Supreme Court of Illinois affirmed in part and reversed in part the appellate court's ruling in the appealed case captioned JERRY MATTHEWS et al., Appellees and Cross-Appellants, v. CHICAGO TRANSIT AUTHORITY et al. (Retirement Plan for Chicago Transit Authority Employees et al., Appellants and Cross-Appellees, Nos. 117638, 117713, 117728 cons. (Ill.). At issue in the appeal is the enforceability of the plaintiffs' rights to retiree health care benefits as set forth in the 2004 collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) and Amalgamated Transit Union Locals 241 and 308 (collectively, the Transit Unions), the labor unions that represented CTA's bus and rail employees for purposes of collective bargaining. After the 2004 CBA expired, the retiree health care benefits were the subject of an interest arbitration award. That award, which modified the retiree health care benefits, was accepted by the CTA and the Transit Unions. The plaintiffs brought a putative class action to challenge the implementation of that award. The individual plaintiffs are five current and retired employees of the CTA who began working for the CTA prior to 2001. In their complaint, they sought to bring claims on behalf of themselves and two putative classes. Plaintiff Jerry Williams retired in 2006 and sought to represent a class of retirees (Class I) who were hired before September 5, 2001, and retired before January 1, 2007. The remaining plaintiffs sought to represent a class of CTA employees and retirees (Class II) who were hired before September 5, 2001, and retired after January 1, 2007, or remain current employees of the CTA. The circuit court of Cook County ruled that the retired CTA employees had standing to challenge the modifications to their retiree health care benefits, but the current CTA employees lacked standing to assert that challenge. On the merits, the circuit court dismissed the complaint in its entirety for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The plaintiffs appealed, and the appellate court affirmed in part and reversed in part. The appellate court upheld the circuit court's ruling that the current CTA employees lacked standing but held that the CTA retirees had a vested right to receive the retiree health care benefits that were provided in the prior CBA and had stated a claim for breach of that contract. The appellate court also held that the retired CTA employees were entitled to pursue their claims for promissory estoppel against the CTA. The defendants further appealed, seeking reversal of the lower courts' rulings with respect to the standing of the CTA retirees and the sufficiency of their claims for breach of contract and promissory estoppel. The plaintiffs cross-appealed, arguing that the lower courts erred in ruling that the current employees lack standing to challenge the health care modifications. The Supreme Court of Illinois affirmed that portion of the appellate court's judgment which upheld the dismissal of all claims by the Class II plaintiffs. The Court also affirmed that portion of the judgment holding that the Class I plaintiffs stated a cause of action for breach of contract against the Retirement Plan, the Retirement Plan Board, the Health Trust, and the Health Trust Board (collectively, the Plan and Trust defendants). The Court further affirmed that portion of the judgment which held that the Class I plaintiffs stated a cause of action for declaratory judgment against the Plan and Trust defendants. The Court also affirmed that portion of the judgment which reversed the dismissal of the Class I plaintiffs' claim for violation of article XIII, section 5, of the Illinois Constitution against the Plan and Trust defendants. Finally, the Court reversed that portion of the appellate court's judgment holding that the Class I plaintiffs stated a claim for promissory estoppel against the CTA. Accordingly, the Court remanded the cause to the appellate court, with directions to remand to the circuit court for further proceedings. A full-text copy of the Court's May 5, 2016 opinion is available at https://is.gd/qxESmN from Leagle.com. CHINA CAFETERIA: Faces Suit in Ga. for FLSA Violation ----------------------------------------------------- ERIBERTO BOJORQUEZ-GUTIERREZ, and DIANA BOJORQUEZ, Plaintiff, vs. CHINA CAFETERIA FOOD GROUP, LLC, MTFG CHINA I, LLC, and MICHAEL TIEN, Defendant, Case 1:16-cv-01439-CAP (N.D. Ga., May 2, 2016), seeks payment for alleged unpaid minimum and overtime wages, liquidated damages, reasonable attorney's fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. China Cafeteria Food Group LLC is in the Chinese Restaurant business. Defendant Tien is the sole member manager of Defendant China Cafeteria Food Group, LLC and Defendant MTFG China I, LLC. Defendant Tien at all relevant times was a manager with operation control of the Defendants cafeterias. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Dawson Morton, Esq. DAWSON MORTON, LLC 104 Cambridge Ave Decatur, GA 30030 Phone: (404) 590-1295 Fax: (404) 377-7637 CHRYSLER: Recalls 300 2012 Models Due to Crash Risk --------------------------------------------------- Starting date: April 26, 2016 Type of communication: Recall Subcategory: Car, SUV Notification type: Safety TC System: Powertrain Units affected: 55144 Source of recall: Transport Canada Identification number: 2016184TC ID number: 2016184 Manufacturer recall number: S27 On certain vehicles, the gear shift position indicators and warnings may not be sufficient to deter drivers from exiting the vehicle when the transmission is inadvertently left in a gear other than "Park". If this occurs and the driver exits the vehicle with the engine running and the parking brake has not been set, unintended vehicle movement can result, increasing the risk of injury and/or a crash. Correction: Dealers will update vehicle software to include additional features to protect against driver error. Make Model Model year(s) affected ---- ----- ---------------------- CHRYSLER 300 2012 CITY DEE: "Zacarias" Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime Pay --------------------------------------------------- Eulalio Zacarias and John Doe, the Plaintiff, v. City Dee Designs L.L.C. and Danilo Uckar, the Defendants, Case No. 702896/2016 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., March 11, 2016), seeks to recover unpaid overtime, liquidated damages and statutory penalties and attorneys' fees and costs, pursuant to the New York Labor Law. According to the complaint, the Defendants knowingly and willfully operated their business with a policy of not providing a proper wage statement to Plaintiffs and other non-exempt employees, in violation of the New York Labor Law. In fact, Plaintiffs did not receive any wage statements during their period of employment with Defendants. The Defendants are engaged in carpentry and design business. The Plaintiff is represented by: C.K. Xee, Esq. Anne Seelig, Esq. LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC 30 East 39th Street, Second Floor New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 465 1188 Facsimile: (212) 465 1181 E-mail: info@leelitigation.com CLOVIS ONCOLOGY: Electrical Workers Suit Remanded to San Mateo -------------------------------------------------------------- Judge Edward M. Chen granted the plaintiff's motion to remand the case captioned ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL #357 PENSION AND HEALTH & WELFARE TRUSTS, Plaintiff, v. CLOVIS ONCOLOGY, INC., et al., Defendants, Case No. 16-cv-00933-EMC (N.D. Cal.), remanding the case to the San Mateo Superior Court. A full-text copy of Judge Chen's May 5, 2016 order is available at https://is.gd/iYrUH2 from Leagle.com. The securities class action was filed by the Electrical Workers Local #357 Pension and Health & Welfare Trusts against Clovis Oncology, Inc., executives Patrick J. Mahaffy, Erle T. Mast, M. James Barrett, Brian G. Atwood, James C. Blair, Paul Klingenstein, Edward J. McKinley, Scott D. Sandell, Forest Baskett, and venture capital firms NEA 13 GP, Ltd., Aberdare Ventures IV, L.P., and underwriters J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated, and Mizuho Securities USAS Inc. alleging violations of sections 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933. Electrical Workers Local #357 Pension And Health & Welfare Trusts, Plaintiff, represented by Shawn A. Williams -- shawnw@rgrdlaw.com -- Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP. Electrical Workers Local #357 Pension And Health & Welfare Trusts, On behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, represented by David Conrad Walton -- davew@rgrdlaw.com -- Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP & James Ian Jaconette -- jamesj@rgrdlaw.com -- Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP. Clovis Oncology, Inc., Patrick J. Mahaffy, Erle T Mast, M. James Barrett, Brian G. Atwood, James C Blair, Paul Klingenstein, Edward J McKinley, Defendant, represented by Aaron Christopher Humes -- ahumes@sycr.com -- Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth, P.C., Tariq Mundiya -- tmundiya@willkie.com -- Willkie Farr and Gallagher LLP, pro hac vice, Todd G. Cosenza -- tconsenza@willkie.com -- Willkie Farr and Gallagher LLP, pro hac vice, Charles Dean Cording -- ccording@willkie.com -- Willkie Farr and Gallagher LLP, pro hac vice & John Francis Cannon -- jcannon@sycr.com -- Stradling Yocca et al. Scott D. Sandell, Forest Baskett, NEA Partners 13, L.P., NEA 13 GP, LTD, Aberdare Ventures IV, L.P., Defendant, represented by Roger Allan Lane -- rlane@foley.com -- Foley and Lardner LLP, pro hac vice & Thomas Stedman Brown -- tsbrown@foley.com -- Foley Lardner. J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated, Mizuho Securities USA Inc., Defendant, represented by Robert Andrew Sacks -- sacksr@sullcrom.com -- Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, Alexa Megan Lawson-Remer -- lawsonr@sullcrom.com -- Sullivan and Cromwell LLP & Laura Kabler Oswell -- oswell@sullcrom.com -- Sullivan & Cromwell LLP. COLLECTIONS BUREAU: Bid to Dismiss "Brown" Suit Denied ------------------------------------------------------ Judge Richard Seeborg denied the defendant's motion to dismiss the case captioned MALIK BROWN, Plaintiff, v. COLLECTIONS BUREAU OF AMERICA, LTD, Defendant, Case No. 16-cv-00720-RS (N.D. Cal.). A full-text copy of Judge Seeborg's May 2, 2016 order is available at https://is.gd/HptsAN from Leagle.com. Malik Brown filed the putative class action, complaining that the Collections Bureau of America, Ltd. has violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). Brown avered that beginning around August of 2013, the defendant "or its agents" called his cellular telephone "at least 16 times using an automatic telephone dialing system and/or artificial or pre-recorded voice without his prior express written consent." Malik Brown, Plaintiff, represented by Yeremey O. Krivoshey -- ykrivoshey@bursor.com -- Bursor Fisher, P.A., Annick Marie Persinger -- apersinger@bursor.com -- Bursor & Fisher, P.A., Lawrence Timothy Fisher -- ltfisher@bursor.com -- Bursor & Fisher, P.A. & Scott A. Bursor -- scott@bursor.com -- Bursor & Fisher, P.A., pro hac vice. Collections Bureau of America, LTD, Defendant, represented by Gabe Peterson Wright -- gwright@hahnlaw.com -- Hahn Loeser & Parks LLP. CONN'S INC: Hearing on Securities Action Postponed Sine Die ----------------------------------------------------------- Conn's, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2016, that for the fiscal year ended January 31, 2016, that the briefing on the defendant's motion to dismiss the Securities Class Action Litigation has been fully briefed and the Court held a hearing on defendants' motion on March 25, 2016. That hearing was not concluded and the completion of that hearing was postponed until a future date. The Company said, "We and two of our current and former executive officers are defendants in a consolidated securities class action lawsuit pending in the Southern District of Texas (the "Court"), In re Conn's Inc. Securities Litigation, Cause No. 14-CV-00548 (the "Consolidated Securities Action"). The Consolidated Securities Action started as three separate purported securities class action lawsuits filed between March 5, 2014 and May 5, 2014 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas that were consolidated into the Consolidated Securities Action on June 3, 2014. The plaintiffs in the Consolidated Securities Action allege that the defendants made false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose material adverse facts about our business, operations, and prospects. They allege violations of sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder and seek to certify a class of all persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Conn's common stock and/or call options, or sold/wrote Conn's put options between April 3, 2013 and December 9, 2014. The complaint does not specify the amount of damages sought." "On June 30, 2015, the Court held a hearing on the defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' complaint. At the hearing, the Court dismissed Brian Taylor, a former executive officer, and certain other aspects of the complaint. The Court ordered the plaintiffs to further amend their complaint in accordance with its ruling, and the plaintiffs filed their Fourth Consolidated Amended Complaint on July 21, 2015. The remaining defendants filed a motion to dismiss on August 28, 2015. The briefing on the defendant's motion to dismiss was fully briefed and the Court held a hearing on defendants' motion on March 25, 2016. That hearing was not concluded and the completion of that hearing was postponed until a future date." The defendants intend to vigorously defend against all of these claims. It is not possible at this time to predict the timing or outcome of any of this litigation, and we cannot reasonably estimate the possible loss or range of possible loss from these claims. Conn's is a specialty retailer that offers a broad selection of quality, branded durable consumer goods and related services in addition to a proprietary credit solution for its core credit constrained consumers. COSTCO WHOLESALE: 9th Cir. Rules on "Maple" Appeal -------------------------------------------------- The United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit affirmed in part and vacated in part the district court's dismissal of Harold Maple's complaint against Costco Wholesale Corporation and Niagara Bottling LLC. Maple's putative class-action complaint alleged deceptive labeling in violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act resulting from his purchase of "VitaRain Tropical Mango Vitamin Enhanced Water Beverage." The Ninth Circuit found that the district court correctly held that the complaint failed to state a claim and that dismissal without leave to amend was proper. The appellate court, however, found that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the action without prejudice. The case was remanded with instructions to re-enter judgment "with prejudice." The case is HAROLD MAPLE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, a Washington corporation; NIAGARA BOTTLING LLC, a California limited liability company, Defendants-Appellees. HAROLD MAPLE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, a Washington corporation, Defendant-Appellant, and NIAGARA BOTTLING LLC, a California limited liability company, Defendants. HAROLD MAPLE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, a Washington corporation, Defendants, and NIAGARA BOTTLING LLC, a California limited liability company, Defendant-Appellant, Nos. 13-36089, 14-35038, 14-35059 (9th Cir.). A full-text copy of the Ninth Circuit's May 9, 2016 order is available at https://is.gd/on1754 from Leagle.com. COX COMMUNICATIONS: "Feeney" Sues Over Premium Cable Tie-up ----------------------------------------------------------- Sean P. Feeney and Louis W. Grande Plaintiffs, v. Cox Communications, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 5:16-cv-00440-C (D. R.I., April 28, 2016), seeks enjoinment, award of all statutory damages, compensatory and other damages, reasonable attorney fees and costs and any other relief under the Sherman Antitrust Act. Cox tied up Premium Cable services to the rental of a set-top box, thus constraining competition in the market for the sale or lease of set-top boxes and to charge supra-competitive profits by overcharging for its set-top boxes. Feeney and Grande are subscribed to Cox Premium Cable and rented one or more set-top boxes from the Defendant. Cox Communications, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Atlanta, Georgia. Cox provides multi-channel video programming distribution through a cable network and also leases set-top boxes to its subscribers. The Plaintiff is represented by: Sonja L. Deyoe, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF SONJA L. DEYOE 395 Smith Street Providence, RI 02908 Telephone: (401) 864-5877 Email: sld@the-straight-shooter.com - and - Todd M. Schneider, Esq. Jason Kim, Esq. SCHNEIDER WALLACE COTTRELL KONECKY WOTKYNS, LLP 2000 Powell Street, Suite 1400 Emeryville, CA 94608 Tel: (415) 421-7100 Fax: (415) 421-7105 Email: TSchneider@schneiderwallace.com jkim@schneiderwallace.com - and - Allan Kanner, Esq. Cynthia St. Amant, Esq. KANNER & WHITELEY, LLC 701 Camp Street Arizona, LA 70130 Tel: (504) 524-5777 Fax: (504) 524-5763 Email: a.kanner@kanner-law.com c.stamant@kanner-law.com - and - Joe R. Whatley, Jr., Esq. WHATLEY DRAKE & KALLAS, LLC 380 Madison Avenue, 23rd Floor New York, NY 10017 Tel: (212) 447-7070 Fax: (212) 447-7077 Email: jwhatley@wdklaw.com CREDIT ONE: Minor "AD" Seeks Certification of TCPA Class -------------------------------------------------------- The Plaintiff in the lawsuit entitled A.D., by and through her guardian ad litem Judith Serrano, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Credit One Bank, N.A., Case No. 1:14- cv-10106 (N.D. Ill.), asks the Court to certify this class: All persons in the United States who, within four years of the filing of this action both (1) received a non-emergency call by, on behalf of, or for the benefit of the Defendant Credit One, where the call was placed to a cellular telephone through the use of an automatic telephone dialing system or an artificial or prerecorded voice and (2) at the time the call was placed Defendant Credit One did not have the person's express prior consent to receive the call because either (a) the person did not provide the cellular telephone number during the transaction that resulted in the debt owed or (b) the person revoked consent during a telephone call with Defendant Credit One or its vendors or sent Defendant a written request to stop calling. Plaintiff A.D., then age 15, received 39 auto-dialed calls on her cell phone placed by Credit One and by a vendor retained by Credit One, to collect money for a delinquent credit card account owed by the Plaintiff's mother, Judith Serrano. The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant never had consent to call A.D., and her mother never provided Alexa's number to the Defendant (or anyone else regarding her credit card account) at any time. Thus Plaintiff, by and through her guardian ad litem Judith Serrano, brings this case under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act to remedy harassing debt collection calls by the Defendant. A copy of the Motion is available at no charge at http://d.classactionreporternewsletter.com/u?f=VIfEZOE3 The Plaintiff is represented by: Mark Ankcorn, Esq. ANKCORN LAW FIRM, PC 11622 El Camino Real, Suite 100 Del Mar, CA 92130 Telephone: (619) 870-0600 Facsimile: (619) 684-3541 E-mail: mark@ankcorn.com - and - Roberto Robledo, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF ROBERTO ROBLEDO 9845 Erma Road, Suite 300 San Diego, CA 92131 Telephone: (619) 500-6683 Facsimile: (619) 810-2980 E-mail: roberto@robertorobledo.com CYBEX INTERNATIONAL: Recalls Free Weight Benches ------------------------------------------------ The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with Cybex International, Inc. of Medway, Mass., announced a voluntary recall of about 400 Decline free weight benches. Consumers should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product. The frame on the bench can collapse forward onto the user, posing an impact injury hazard. This recall involves the Olympic Decline free weight bench with model numbers 16060, 16061, 16062 and 16063. The bench consists of a steel frame with an upholstered pad on which the user rests his/her back, and a rack on which the user can engage a 7-foot bar with its weight plates when the user completes the exercise routine. On all of these models the upholstered pad is configured at a 15 degree angle so that, in use, the user's back and shoulders are lower than the user's thighs and knees. A decal bearing the unit's model and serial number is affixed to the tube near where the user's feet are placed when using the unit. The recalled benches have serial numbers C1208 through K0915, which represent manufacture dates of December 2008 through September 2015. "Cybex" is printed on the benches. The firm received 10 reports of frames breaking near the weld point. No injuries have been reported. Pictures of the Recalled Products available at: https://is.gd/iiANXG The recalled products were manufactured in U.S. and sold at Cybex direct sales force or its distributors directly to gyms nationwide from December 2008 through September 2015 for about $1,100. Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled benches and contact Cybex to arrange to return the weight bench and for a free replacement unit. Cybex is directly contacting owners of the recalled benches. DAYBREAK VENTURE: Fails to Pay Employees OT, "Ross" Action Claims ----------------------------------------------------------------- Veronica Ross, Stephanie Wagner, Lisa Traylor, Crystal Kilwili, Denise Birch, and Tara Garrett v. Daybreak Venture L.L.C. and Frankston Healthcare Center, L.P., Case No. 2:16-cv-00479-JRG (E.D. Tex., May 5, 2016), is brought against the Defendants to recover wages for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per workweek. The Defendants own and operate a nursing home located at 500 S. Taylor, Suite 1100, LB 219, Amarillo, Texas 79101. The Plaintiff is represented by: Harry Bob Whitehurst, Esq. BOB WHITEHURST, ATTORNEY AT LAW 5380 Old Bullard Road, Suite 600, #363 Tyler, TX 75703 Telephone: (903) 593-5588 Facsimile: (214) 853-9382 E-mail: whitehurstlawfirm@yahoo.com DELTA OUTSOURCE: Illegally Collects Debt,"Hamra" Suit Claims ------------------------------------------------------------ Yaffa Hamra, on behalf of herself and all other similarly situated consumers v. Delta Outsource Group, Inc., Case No. 1:16-cv-02259 (E.D.N.Y., May 5, 2016), seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt. Delta Outsource Group, Inc. specializes in post charge-off financial services products. The Plaintiff is represented by: Maxim Maximov, Esq. MAXIM MAXIMOV, LLP 1701 Avenue P Brooklyn, NY 11229 Telephone: (718) 395-3459 Facsimile: (718) 408-9570 E-mail: m@maximovlaw.com DEUTSCHE BANK: 9th Cir. Affirms Dismissal of "Anderson" Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- In the case captioned JOANNE ANDERSON, an individual in her own capacity and as heir to the Estate of ELLIOT BERD, now deceased; et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS, Defendant, and AURORA LOAN SERVICES, LLC and NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, Defendants-Appellees, No. 14-55822 (9th Cir.), the United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of the negligence-based claims against Aurora Loan Services, LLC, as well as the claim that Nationstar Loan Services, LLC violated California's Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. A full-text copy of the Ninth Circuit's May 4, 2016 order is available at https://is.gd/lguPZQ from Leagle.com. The putative class action was filed by a group of financially distressed home mortgagors who accused mortgage servicers Aurora Loan Services, LLC and Nationstar Loan Services, LLC of a range of unlawful behaviors related to offering loan modifications. DIGITEK COMPUTER: Joint Bid to Notify "Viciedo" Class Granted ------------------------------------------------------------- The Hon. James L. Graham granted, pursuant to Section 216(b) of the Labor Code, a joint motion of the parties for an order authorizing notice to similarly situated persons in the lawsuit captioned Louis Viciedo, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Digitek Computer Products, Inc., Case No. 2:15-cv-03073-JLG-NMK (S.D. Ohio). A copy of the Order is available at no charge at http://d.classactionreporternewsletter.com/u?f=8pf2dLFi EDAP TMS S.A.: Plaintiff Did Not Appeal Dismissal ------------------------------------------------- Edap TMS S.A. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 4, 2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the plaintiff has not appealed the dismissal of a class action lawsuit. On August 4, 2014, Mark Eaton filed a purported class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, asserting that the Company, Marc Oczachowski, and Eric Soyer (our former Chief Financial Officer) violated federal securities laws Section 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by issuing materially false and misleading statements about the Company's business operations and prospects particularly concerning the Company's Ablatherm-HIFU PMA file under review by the FDA that caused the price of the Company's American Depository Receipts to be artificially inflated during the period from February 1, 2013 to July 30, 2014. On August 6, 2014, Ronnie Haddad filed a second purported class action lawsuit, also in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, asserting similar claims. On October 24, 2014, the related cases were consolidated by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and a lead plaintiff and lead counsel were appointed. On December 22, 2014, the lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint that no longer included Mr. Soyer. The amended complaint alleges that the Company and Mr. Oczachowski breached their obligations under the Exchange Act in various ways, including by misrepresenting and failing to disclose allegedly material information about the safety and efficacy of treatment with Ablatherm-HIFU, and the Company's interactions with the FDA. The complaint seeks unspecified damages, interest, costs, and fees, including attorneys' and experts' fees. The Company said, "On December 31, 2014, we accrued $250,000 (EUR206,000) as legal costs to be incurred by the Company in relation to this litigation." On February 20, 2015, the defendants, including the Company, filed a motion to dismiss the action. "On September 14, 2015, we received a confirmation of the dismissal of our class action. On November 11, 2015, we announced the appeals period had concluded with no notice of appeal had been filed by the plaintiffs. The remaining accrued amount was reversed as of December 31, 2015," the Company said. ELOCAL USA: Sued in Cal. Super. Ct. Over Phone Call Recording ------------------------------------------------------------- Vanessa Chaides, individually and on behalf of other individuals similarly situated, the Plaintiff, eLocal USA LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; and DOES 1-100, the Defendants, Case No. BC613857 (Cal. Super. Ct., March 15, 2016), seeks relief to remedy Defendants' improper recording of telephonic communications, in violation of the Penal Code and Unfair Practices Act. According to the complaint, the Defendants have a standard, uniform practice of recording incoming telephone calls without obtaining the callers' knowledge, consent and/or permission. In so doing, they are violating California state law with impunity. Elocal USA is an advertising promotional products and service located in Conshohocken, Pennsylvania. The Plaintiff is represented by: Marcus J. Bradley, Esq. Kiley L. Grombacher, Esq. Cody R. Kennedy, Esq. MARLIN & SALTZMAN, LLP 29229 Canwood Street, Suite 208 Agoura Hills, CA 91301 Telephone: (818)991 8080 Facsimile: (818)991 8081 E-mail: mbradley@marlinsaltzfnan.com kgrombacher@marlinsaltzman.com ckennedy@marlinsaltzman.com EMSP LLC: Certification of Independent Contractors Class Sought --------------------------------------------------------------- The Plaintiffs in the lawsuit styled JESSICA MARILU ROSALEZ FUNEZ, SULMA HERNANDEZ, CANDY MELISSA ZAMORA, JULIA S. CARBALLO, DIANNA MEJIA, DILCIA NUNEZ, KARLINA MOLINA, LYDIA VEGA, and REYNA RODRIGUEZ, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated v. E.M.S.P., LLC, EDWIN A. MIRANDA, and * JURY TRIAL DEMANDED SADIA ESTHER PALACIO, Case No. 2:16-cv-01922-JTM-KWR (E.D. La.), ask the Court to enter an order: (1) conditionally certifying the case as a Collective Action; and (2) authorizing, under Court supervision, the issuance of the Plaintiffs' proposed Notice and Consent form pursuant to Section 216(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The putative class to which the Plaintiffs seek to facilitate notice consists of all individuals, who (a) worked for E.M.S.P., LLC at any time during the past three years; and (b) were classified as independent contractors instead of employees. The Plaintiffs further ask the Court to: -- order E.M.S.P, LLC to produce to Plaintiffs' counsel a computer-readable data file containing all Putative Class Members' names, last-known mailing addresses, e-mail addresses, telephone numbers, and dates of employment/work within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Order; -- authorize a notice period allowing Putative Class Members 90 days from the date the Notice is sent out to submit their Consents to join with the Plaintiffs' counsel; -- authorize the use of online, electronic signature opt-in forms; and -- enter an order prohibiting retaliation by E.M.S.P. or its managers against individuals, who opt-in to the lawsuit. A copy of the Motion is available at no charge at http://d.classactionreporternewsletter.com/u?f=8trukJy8 The Plaintiffs are represented by: Michael T. Tusa, Jr., Esq. SUTTON, ALKER & RATHER, LLC 4080 Lonesome Road, Suite A Mandeville, LA 70448 Telephone: (985) 727-7501 Facsimile: (985) 727-7505 E-mail: mtusa@sutton-alker.com - and - Christopher L. Williams, Esq. WILLIAMS LITIGATION, L.L.C. 639 Loyola Ave., Suite 1850 New Orleans, LA 70113 Telephone: (504) 908-1438 Facsimile: (504) 308-1446 E-mail: chris@williamslitigation.com EQUITY RESIDENTIAL: Sued in N.Y. Sup. Ct. Over Rent Overcharges --------------------------------------------------------------- John Franklin, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Equity Residential Management, LLC, in its capacity as agent for Equity Residential, and Equity Residential, the Defendants, Case No. 651360/2016 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., March 15, 2016), seeks to recover money damages as a result of Defendants' rent overcharges. According to the complaint, the Defendants illegally charged the Plaintiff market-rate rents (i.e., rents in excess of the legal rent stabilized levels) for Plaintiff's dwelling units in violation of New York Real Property Tax Law Equity Residential is a publicly traded real estate investment trust based in Chicago, Illinois. The Plaintiff is represented by: Neil B. Solomon, Esq. Brett R. Gallaway, Esq. Wade C. Wilkinson, Esq McLAUGHLIN & STERN, LLP 260 Madison A venue New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 448 1100 E-mail: nsolomon@mclaughlinstern.com bgallaway@mclaughlinstern.com wwilkinson@mclaughlinstern.com FACEBOOK INC: Faces Suit Over Collection of Cancer Patients' Info ----------------------------------------------------------------- Winston Smith; Jane Doe I; and Jane Doe II, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. Facebook, Inc.; American Cancer Society, Inc.; American Society of Clinical Oncology, Inc.; Melanoma Research Foundation; Adventist Health System; BJC Healthcare; Cleveland Clinic; and University Of Texas - MD Anderson Cancer Center, the Defendants, Case No. 5:16-cv-01282 (N.D. Cal., March 15, 2016), seeks damages and injunctive relief for privacy violations by Facebook on the websites Cancer.org, Cancer.net, Melanoma.org, ShawneeMission.org, BarnesJewish.org, ClevelandClinic.org, MDAnderson.org, and other health care and hospital websites. According to the complaint, Plaintiffs' cancer and other sensitive health-related Internet communications with these medical websites were divulged to Facebook and acquired by Facebook along with the Plaintiffs' personally-identifiable information. In addition, Facebook acquired, tracked, and used the Plaintiffs' sensitive medical information collected through medical websites and the Facebook website for purposes of direct marketing. Facebook operates as a mobile application and Website that enables people to connect, share, discover, and communicate each other on mobile devices and personal computers worldwide. The Plaintiff is represented by: Paul R. Kiesel, Esq. Jeffrey A. Koncius, Esq. Nicole Ramirez, Esq. KIESEL LAW LLP 8648 Wilshire Boulevard Beverly Hills, CA 90211-2910 Telephone: (310) 854 4444 Facsimile: (310) 854 0812 E-mail: kiesel@kiesel-law.com koncius@kiesel-law.com ramirez@kiesel-law.com - and - Stephen M. Gorny, Esq. Chris Dandurand, Esq. THE GORNY LAW FIRM, LC 2 Emanuel Cleaver II Boulevard, Suite 410 Kansas City, MO 64112 Telephone: (816) 756 5056 Facsimile: (816) 756 5067 E-mail: steve@gornylawfirm.com chris@gornylawfirm.com - and - Jay Barnes, Esq. Rod Chapel, Esq. BARNES & ASSOCIATES 219 East Dunklin Street, Suite A Jefferson City, MO 65101 Telephone: (573) 634 8884 Facsimile: (573) 635 6291 E-mail: jaybarnes5@zoho.com rod.chapel@gmail.com FACEBOOK INC: Sued in Delaware Over Reclassification of Share -------------------------------------------------------------- Pedro Ramirez Jr., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Mark Zuckerberg, Sheryl Sandberg, Marc Andreessen, Erskine B. Bowles, Susan Desmond- Hellmann, Reed Hastings, Jan Koum, Peter A. Thiel, and Facebook, Inc., the Defendants, Case No. 12283-CB (Del. Chancery Ct., April 29, 2016), seeks to enjoin Defendants from proceeding with reclassification of the Company's shares, and in the event that the reclassification is consummated, Plaintiff seeks to recover damages from the Director Defendants for their breaches of fiduciary duty. According to the complaint, Facebook's dual class stock structure had its intended effect and solidified management and permitted Zuckerberg to continue to dominate Facebook, allowing him the ability to continue to appoint all directors unilaterally and insulate himself from dissenting views. At the time of the IPO, however, there was certainly no plan announced to perpetuate Zuckerberg's domination if he lost such dominance due to share sales or otherwise. Nor was there a plan announced to allow Zuckerberg to remain in control through a reclassification that would effectively turn half the publicly-traded Class A shares into non-voting shares, under a plan in which all detriments would be borne by the Class A shareholders, and all benefits would be enjoyed by Zuckerberg. Facebook operates as a mobile application and Website that enables people to connect, share, discover, and communicate each other on mobile devices and personal computers worldwide. Mark Zuckerberg is the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors at Facebook. Zuckerberg founded Facebook in 2004 while studying computer science at Harvard University. He is the largest and controlling shareholder of Facebook. The Plaintiff is represented by: Blake A. Bennett, Esq. COOCH AND TAYLOR, P.A. The Brandywine Building 1000 West St., 10th Floor Wilmington, DE 19801 Telephone: 302 984 3800 Facsimile: 302 984 3939 E-mail: bbennett@coochtaylor.com - and - Michael D. Hausfeld, Esq. William P. Butterfield, Esq. Timothy S. Kearns, Esq. HAUSFELD LLP 1700 K Street, Suite 650 Washington, DC 20006 Telephone: (202) 540 7200 Facsimile: (202) 540 7201 E-mail: mhausfeld@hausfeld.com wbutterfield@hausfeld.com tkearns@hausfeld.com - and - Laurence D. Paskowitz, Esq. THE PASKOWITZ LAW FIRM P.C. 208 East 51st Street, Suite 380 New York, NY 10022 Telephone: 212 685 0969 Facsimile: 212 685 2306 E-mail: lpaskowitz@pasklaw.com FACEBOOK INC: Ill. Law Applies to Privacy Litigation, Court Says ---------------------------------------------------------------- Judge James Donato denied Facebook, Inc.'s motions to dismiss and for summary judgment in the case captioned IN RE FACEBOOK BIOMETRIC INFORMATION PRIVACY LITIGATION, Case No. 15-cv-03747-JD (N.D. Cal.). In the putative class action under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act ("BIPA"), the named plaintiffs alleged that defendant Facebook unlawfully collected and stored biometric data derived from their faces. Although the case was brought by Illinois residents under Illinois law, it is before the United States District Court for the Northern District of California because the parties agreed to transfer it from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Facebook argued that the plaintiffs have failed to state a claim under BIPA and that a California choice-of-law provision in its user agreement precludes suing on an Illinois statute. The plaintiffs said the BIPA allegations do state a claim and that they never agreed to a choice of California law. Even if they had, plaintiffs contended Illinois law applies under traditional choice-of-law rules. After briefing and an evidentiary hearing on disputed fact issues underlying choice of law, Judge Donato found that Illinois law applies and that the plaintiffs have stated a claim under BIPA. A full-text copy of Judge Donato's May 5, 2016 order is available at https://is.gd/a4wpZA from Leagle.com. Nimesh Patel, Plaintiff, represented by Paul Jeffrey Geller -- pgeller@rgrdlaw.com -- Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, pro hac vice, Alexander Nguyen, Edelson P.C., Frank Anthony Richter -- frichter@rgrdlaw.com -- Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd, Mark Dearman -- mdearman@rgrdlaw.com -- Robbins Geller Rudman and Dowd LLP, pro hac vice, Rafey S. Balabanian -- rbalabanian@edelson.com -- Edelson PC, pro hac vice, Shawn A. Williams -- shawnw@rgrdlaw.com -- Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, Stuart Andrew Davidson -- sdavidson@rgrdlaw.com -- Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, pro hac vice & James E Barz -- jbarz@rgrdlaw.com -- Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP. ADAM PEZEN, Plaintiff, represented by Corban S Rhodes -- crhodes@labaton.com -- Labaton Sucharow LLP, pro hac vice, Joel H. Bernstein -- jbernstein@labaton.com -- Labaton Sucharow LLP, pro hac vice, Ross M Kamhi -- rkamhi@labaton.com -- Labaton Sucharow Llp, pro hac vice, Shawn A. Williams, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, Alexander Nguyen, Edelson P.C. & Rafey S. Balabanian, Edelson PC, pro hac vice. Carlo Licata, Plaintiff, represented by Jay Edelson -- jedelson@edelson.com -- Edelson PC, pro hac vice, Shawn A. Williams, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, Alexander Nguyen, Edelson P.C., pro hac vice, J. Dominick Larry -- nlarry@edelson.com -- Edelson P.C. & Rafey S. Balabanian, Edelson PC, pro hac vice. Facebook Inc., Defendant, represented by Vincent J. Connelly -- vconnelly@mayerbrown.com -- Mayer Brown LLP, Archis A. Parasharami -- aparasharami@mayerbrown.com -- Mayer Brown LLP, pro hac vice, John Nadolenco -- jnadolenco@mayerbrown.com -- Mayer Brown LLP, Lauren R Goldman -- lrgoldman@mayerbrown.com -- Mayer Brown Llp, pro hac vice & Matthew David Provance -- mprovance@mayerbrown.com -- Mayer Brown LLP, pro hac vice. Frederick William Gullen, Interested Party, represented by Frank S Hedin -- fhedin@careyrodriguez.com -- Carey Rodriguez, LLP. FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT: "Rajagopalan" Settlement Has Initial Okay --------------------------------------------------------------- Judge Benjamin H. Settle granted a joint motion filed on April 7, 2016, by settlement class representatives and Platte River Insurance Company for preliminary approval of their class action settlement. The parties entered into a Class Action Settlement Agreement and Release, dated March 23, 2016 to settle the case captioned AMRISH RAJAGOPALAN, MARIE JOHNSON-PEREDO, ROBERT HEWSON, DONTE CHEEKS, DEBORAH HORTON, RICHARD PIERCE, ERMA SUE CLYATT, ROBERT JOYCE, AMY JOYCE, ARTHUR FULLER, DAWN MEADE, WAHAB EKUNSUMI, KAREN HEA, ALEX CASIANO, DECEMBER GUZZO, BEN PARKER, CHERYL ANDERSON, CARMEN ALFONSO, BETH JUNGEN, TANYA GWATHNEY, KEVIN DELOACH, SCOTT SNOEK, KELLY ENDERS, THOMAS LUDWICK, DONALD BOGAN, BILL KRUSE, JOYCE DRUMMOND, TAMARA COOPER, DEBRA MILLER, GEORGE LAWRENCE, CYNTHIA OXENDINE, MARTIN ANDERSON, ANGELA ROSS, ANDREA TOPPS, DEBRA FINAZZO, SHARRON BLACK, SYLVIA HADCOCK, AUDRIE LAWRENCE (POOLE), ADAM WARD, ISHULA MCCONNELL, ERICA CHASE, STEPHEN YOUNKINS, DAN WEDDLE, STILLMAN PARKER, TINA ROBERTS-ASHBY, BRANDON ASHBY, VALERIE NEWSOME, and RUSSEL TANNER, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. FIDELITY AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF MARYLAND and PLATTE RIVER INSURANCE COMPANY, as Sureties for Meracord LLC, Defendants, No. 3:16-cv-05147-BHS (W.D. Wash.), as well as the action captioned Cheeks v. Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland and Platte River Ins. Co., as sureties for Meracord LLC, No. 4:13-cv-01854-DR (N.D. Cal. Filed April 23, 2013). Judge Settle preliminarily certified for settlement purposes only the following settlement class: "all persons who had an account at Meracord from which Meracord deducted any fees related to debt settlement services (including mortgage assistance relief services) and who, while residing in a Platte River State, made payments to such account within the Bond Period2 of their state of residence." Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP and The Paynter Law Firm PLLC were appointed as class counsel. Garden City Group, LLC was appointed as administrator. A full-text copy of Judge Settle's May 3, 2016 order is available at https://is.gd/MWwnpy from Leagle.com. Amrish Rajagopalan, Marie Johnson-Peredo, Robert Hewson, Donte Cheeks, Deborah Horton, Richard Pierce, Erma Sue Clyatt, Robert Joyce, Amy Joyce, Arthur Fuller, Dawn Meade, Wahab Ekunsumi, Karen Hea, Alex Casiano, December Guzzo, Ben Parker, Cheryl Anderson, Carmen Alfonso, Beth Jungen, Tanya Gwathney, Kevin Deloach, Scott Snoek, Kelly Enders, Thomas Ludwick, Donald Bogan, Bill Kruse, Joyce Drummond, Tamara Cooper, Debra Miller, George Lawrence, Cynthia Oxendine, Martin Anderson, Angela Ross, Andrea Topps, Debra Finazzo, Sharron Black, Sylvia Hadcock, Audrie Lawrence, Adam Ward, Ishula McConnell, Erica Chase, Stephen Younkins, Dan Weddle, Stillman Parker, Tina Roberts-Ashby, Brandon Ashby, Valerie Newsome, Russel Tanner, Plaintiffs, represented by Celeste H. G. Boyd -- cboyd@paynterlawfirm.com -- THE PAYNTER LAW FIRM PLLC, pro hac vice, Steve W. Berman -- steve@hbsslaw.com -- HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP, Stuart M Paynter -- stuart@paynterlawfirm.com -- THE PAYNTER LAW FIRM PLLC, pro hac vice & Thomas E Loeser -- toml@hbsslaw.com -- HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP. Platte River Insurance Company, Defendant, represented by Jonathan A Constine -- jonathan.constine@troutmansanders.com -- TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP, pro hac vice & Scott M Stickney -- stickney@wscd.com -- WILSON SMITH COCHRAN & DICKERSON. FIRST NBC BANK: "Kinzler" Sues Over Share Price Drop ---------------------------------------------------- Eric R. Kinzler, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. First NBC Bank Holding Company, Ashton J. Ryan, Jr. and Mary Beth Verdigets, Defendants, Case No. 2:16-cv-04243 (E.D. La., May 5, 2016) seeks damages, including interest, reasonable costs and attorney fees and such equitable/injunctive or other relief under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Plaintiff alleges that First NBC common stock were traded at artificially inflated prices and went down 56% from its high, erasing $454 million in market capitalization after corrective disclosures of material facts, omissions and misrepresentations were made public. First NBC is a bank holding company. The Company offers a range of financial services through its wholly owned banking subsidiary, First NBC Bank. It serves customers located in the Central Business District of New Orleans and the Mississippi Gulf Coast with focus on commercial real estate and commercial lending. Ashton J. Ryan, Jr. was First NBC Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer while Mary Beth Verdigets was Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President. The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew A. Lemmon, Esq. P.O. Box 904 15058 River Road Hahnville, LA 70057 Tel: 985/783-6789 Fax: 985/783-1333 Email: andrew@lemonlawfirm.com - and - Samuel H. Rudman, Esq. Mary K. Blasy, Esq. ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP 58 South Service Road, Suite 200 Melville, NY 11747 Tel: 631/367-7100 Fax: 631/367-1173 - and - FRANK J. JOHNSON, Esq. JOHNSON & WEAVER, LLP 600 West Broadway, Suite 1540 San Diego, CA 92101 Tel: 619/230-0063 Fax: 619/255-1856 - and - Michael I. Fistel, Jr., Esq. JOHNSON & WEAVER, LLP 40 Powder Springs Street Marietta, GA 30064 Tel: 770/200-3104 Fax: 770/200-3101 FIRST STUDENT: "Jackson" Suit Seeks to Recover Overtime Pay --------------------------------------------------------------- Faith Jackson, Johnnie Thomas, Kimberly Shakir, Shannon Frost, Stephanie Campbell, Dardanius Smith,Tracy Joyce, Tamara Frazier, April McClendon, Barbara Williams, Darryl Anderson, Vera Jean Hurd, Ruth Pearson, Toni Owens, Tim Owens, Natalie Adams, Joseph Veloz, Catarra Viltz,Timothy McDonald, Ahisha Steward, Roberta Guidier, Denise Cruz, Tessica Howell, Ireti Sims, Jacky Paul, Mary McHale, Arthur Gartrell, Joyce Creighton, Sheila Brown, Lovellia Simmons, Karen Kelly, Alicia King, Gregory Salomon, Kiera Matthews, Desiree Harrell, Tracy Jones, Yvoime Poole, Tanya Stover, Sandra Turner, Lawanna Thomas, Leapolia Rosinson, Tanya Jackson, Ronda Coney, Alban Roberts, Catherine Williams, Bobby Parrish, Mary Parrish, Quaraetta Quaintance, Olivia McRae, Susan Renee Meredith, Laura Smith, Larrisa Dickerson, Atonia Jossey- Williams, Anabel Torres, Brittany Eiligson, Sherry Collins, Jerry White, Rosa Kermerly, Anthony Reddick, Nerita Buckman, Cynthia Jennings,LynetteThompson, Barbara Jamerson,Lavan White, Dolores Whitfield, Susan Hardy, Marielly Jimenez,Emma Santiago, Daisy Mejia, Lavoid Davis, Dorothy Muller, Lucinda Paden Taylor, Yvonne Bear, Ilene Thomas-Jackson, Ramon Turner, Claretha Jackson, Gloria Green, Nina Busch, Blaine Gilmore, Marsha Bozich, Jessica Smith, Monique Scott, Beverly Smith, Janice Burch, Tamara Welch, Elisha Mims-Wojcichowski, Frank Connell, Laterrel Lester, Do Keim, Mendy Singletary, Michelle Green, Sabrina Sandel, Lisa Denslow, Doreen Spilhnan, individually and on behalf of similarly situated employees, Plaintiffs, v. First Student Management LLC, and First Student Inc., Defendants, Case No.: 3:16-cv-00557-HES-MCR (M.D. Fla., May 5, 2016), seeks actual damages, back pay, liquidated damages, attorney' fees and costs and all other equitable remedies under the Fair Labor Standards Act 29 U.S.C. Sec. 216(b). Plaintiffs were employed by First Student as bus drivers and driver assistants, in the intrastate transportation of students to local municipal schools and providing students intrastate transportation to extracurricular activities. The Defendants allegedly do not compensate the Plaintiffs for prep-time period prior to actual bus trip as well as the post inspection activities they conduct after the buses are parked. First Student Management LLC is a corporation located at 1812 South 12th Street, Allentown, Pennsylvania and is a subsidiary of First Student Inc., a foreign corporation located at 705 Central Avenue, Cincinnati, Ohio. Defendants operate out of approximately 37 separate bus yards in the state of Pennsylvania. The Plaintiff is represented by: Patrick T. Cronin, Esq. CRONIN AND BERKOWITZ 10000 Lincoln Drive, Suite 202 Marlton, NJ 08054 Tel: (856) 350-6200 - and - Robert Edward O'Connell, Esq. ROBERT E O'CONNELL, P.A., Suite 304 1701 W. Hillsboro Blvd. Deerfield Beach, FL 33442 Tel: (954) 482-0424 Fax: (954) 977-7676 Email: reo@reo-law.com - and - Steven A. Berkowitz, Esq. CRONIN AND BERKOWITZ 10000 Lincoln Drive, Suite 202 Marlton, NJ 08054 Tel: (856) 350-6200 Email: sberkowitz@berkpc.com FITBIT: Faces Shareholders' Class Action Over IPO ------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reported that directors of Fitbit and underwriters raised $732 million at $20 a share through errors and omissions, and when the truth emerged the IPO price dropped to less than $12, a class action claims in San Mateo County Court in Redwood City, Calif. FORD: Recalls 2009 and 2008 Vehicle Models Due to Noncompliance --------------------------------------------------------------- Starting date: April 26, 2016 Type of communication: Recall Subcategory: Car Notification type: Compliance Mfr System: Airbag Units affected: 3 Source of recall: Transport Canada Identification number: 2016186TC ID number: 2016186 Manufacturer recall number: 16C06 Certain vehicles may not comply with the requirements of Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (CMVSS) 208 - Occupant Protection in Frontal Impacts. Due to an assembly error involving the driver's frontal airbag, the second stage of the airbag may to fail to deploy. As a result, the vehicle may fail to meet the occupant protection requirements of the standard. This could increase the risk of injury to the seat occupant in a crash where second-stage airbag deployment is warranted. Correction: Dealers will inspect the driver airbag module and, if necessary, replace it. Note: The primary stage of the driver's airbag deployment is not affected. Make Model Model year(s) affected ---- ----- ---------------------- LINCOLN MKS 2009 FORD 2008 FORD: Recalls Multiple Vehicle Models Due to Injury Risk -------------------------------------------------------- Starting date: April 26, 2016 Type of communication: Recall Subcategory: Car, Light Truck & Van, SUV Notification type: Safety TC System: Powertrain Units affected: 17900 Source of recall: Transport Canada Identification number: 2016183TC ID number: 2016183 Manufacturer recall number: 16S19 Certain vehicles equipped with a 6-speed automatic transmission may experience an intermittent loss of the Transmission Output- shaft Speed Sensor (OSS) signal to the Power Control Module. This could potentially cause an unintended downshift into first gear, which depending on vehicle speed at the time of the downshift, may cause the rear tires to slide or lock up until the vehicle slows. This may result in a loss of vehicle control without warning, increasing the risk of a crash causing injury and/or damage to property. Correction: Dealers will reprogram the Powertrain Control Module with updated software. Make Model Model year(s) affected ---- ----- ---------------------- FORD MUSTANG 2012 FORD F150 2011 FORD EXPEDITION 2012 LINCOLN NAVIGATOR 2012 FORD: Recalls Multiple Vehicle Models Due to Crash Risk ------------------------------------------------------- Starting date: April 26, 2016 Type of communication: Recall Subcategory: Truck - Med. & H.D. Notification type: Safety Mfr System: Tires Units affected: 271 Source of recall: Transport Canada Identification number: 2016185TC ID number: 2016185 Manufacturer recall number: 16S17 On certain vehicles, the inner sidewall of the affected tires may have been damaged during vehicle assembly. This could result in a loss of air or, in some cases, a rupture during use. If this were to occur, a damaged tire that ruptures or rapidly loses air may result in a loss of vehicle control, increasing the risk of a crash causing injury and/or damage to property. Correction: Dealers will inspect the tires and replace if necessary. Make Model Model year(s) affected ---- ----- ---------------------- FORD F350 2016 FORD F250 2016 FORD F550 2016 FORD F450 2016 FORD: Recalls Explorer 2014 Models Due to Crash Risk ---------------------------------------------------- Starting date: April 26, 2016 Type of communication: Recall Subcategory: SUV Notification type: Safety Mfr System: Suspension Units affected: 4615 Source of recall: Transport Canada Identification number: 2016182TC ID number: 2016182 Manufacturer recall number: 16S18 Certain vehicles may have been built with an improperly welded rear suspension toe link. If the improperly welded toe link were to fracture while the vehicle is in motion, it could result in rear suspension noise, difficulty steering and/or a loss of steering control, which would increase the risk of a crash causing injury and/or damage to property. Correction: Dealers will replace the rear toe links. Make Model Model year(s) affected ---- ----- ---------------------- FORD EXPLORER 2014 FORD MOTOR: Bids to Dismiss "Philips" Warranty Claims Denied ------------------------------------------------------------ Judge Lucy H. Koh denied Ford Motor Company's motions to dismiss the plaintiffs' Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act claim and Magnuson-Moss warranty Act claim in the case captioned WILLIAM PHILIPS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, Defendant, Case No. 14-CV-02989-LHK (N.D. Cal.). A full-text copy of Judge Koh's May 3, 2016 order is available at https://is.gd/pNLnEa from Leagle.com. William Philips, Jaime Goodman, and Alison Colburn brought the action against Ford Motor Company, seeking to represent a class of statewide consumers who purchased or leased Ford Fusion vehicles, model years 2010 through 2014, or Ford Focus vehicles, model years 2012 through 2014. The plaintiffs alleged that these vehicles are equipped with a defective Electronic Power Assisted Steering ("EPAS") system. William Philips, Plaintiff, represented by Adam J. Levitt -- alevitt@gelaw.com -- Grant & Eisenhofer P.A., pro hac vice, David Brian Fernandes -- dfernandes@baronbudd.com -- Baron Budd PC, John Ernst Tangren -- jtangren@gelaw.com -- Grant and Eisenhofer P.A., pro hac vice, Mary Sikra Thomas -- mthomas@gelaw.com -- Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A., Nathan Bowen Atkinson -- natkinson@spilmanlaw.com -- Spilman Thomas and Battle, PLLC, Niall A Paul -- npaul@spilmanlaw.com -- Spilman Thomas and Battle, PLLC, Mark Philip Pifko -- mpifko@baronbudd.com -- Baron & Budd, P.C. & Roland K. Tellis -- rtellis@baronbudd.com -- Baron Budd, P.C.. Jason Wilkinson, Plaintiff, represented by Adam J. Levitt, Grant & Eisenhofer P.A., pro hac vice, John Ernst Tangren, Grant and Eisenhofer P.A., pro hac vice, Mary Sikra Thomas, Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A., Nathan Bowen Atkinson, Spilman Thomas and Battle, PLLC, Niall A Paul, Spilman Thomas and Battle, PLLC, Mark Philip Pifko, Baron & Budd, P.C. & Roland K. Tellis, Baron Budd, P.C.. Alison Colburn, Plaintiff, represented by David Brian Fernandes, Baron Budd PC, Mary Sikra Thomas, Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A., Nathan Bowen Atkinson, Spilman Thomas and Battle, PLLC & Mark Philip Pifko, Baron & Budd, P.C.. Jaime Goodman, Plaintiff, represented by Adam J. Levitt, Grant & Eisenhofer P.A., David Brian Fernandes, Baron Budd PC, Mary Sikra Thomas, Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A., Nathan Bowen Atkinson, Spilman Thomas and Battle, PLLC & Mark Philip Pifko, Baron & Budd, P.C.. Robert Morris, Plaintiff, represented by Adam J. Levitt, Grant & Eisenhofer P.A., pro hac vice, John Ernst Tangren, Grant and Eisenhofer P.A., pro hac vice, Mary Sikra Thomas, Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A., Nathan Bowen Atkinson, Spilman Thomas and Battle, PLLC, Mark Philip Pifko, Baron & Budd, P.C. & Roland K. Tellis, Baron Budd, P.C.. Victoria Jackson, Plaintiff, represented by Adam J. Levitt, Grant & Eisenhofer P.A., pro hac vice, Mary Sikra Thomas, Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A., Nathan Bowen Atkinson, Spilman Thomas and Battle, PLLC, Niall A Paul, Spilman Thomas and Battle, PLLC, Mark Philip Pifko, Baron & Budd, P.C. & Roland K. Tellis, Baron Budd, P.C.. JohnPaul Fournier, Plaintiff, represented by Adam J. Levitt, Grant & Eisenhofer P.A., pro hac vice, John Ernst Tangren, Grant and Eisenhofer P.A., pro hac vice, Mary Sikra Thomas, Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A., Nathan Bowen Atkinson, Spilman Thomas and Battle, PLLC, Niall A Paul, Spilman Thomas and Battle, PLLC, Mark Philip Pifko, Baron & Budd, P.C. & Roland K. Tellis, Baron Budd, P.C.. Ryan Wolf, Plaintiff, represented by Adam J. Levitt, Grant & Eisenhofer P.A., pro hac vice, John Ernst Tangren, Grant and Eisenhofer P.A., pro hac vice, Mary Sikra Thomas, Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A., Nathan Bowen Atkinson, Spilman Thomas and Battle, PLLC, Niall A Paul, Spilman Thomas and Battle, PLLC, Mark Philip Pifko, Baron & Budd, P.C. & Roland K. Tellis, Baron Budd, P.C.. Rebecca Wolf, Plaintiff, represented by Adam J. Levitt, Grant & Eisenhofer P.A., pro hac vice, Mary Sikra Thomas, Grant & Eisenhofer, P.A., Nathan Bowen Atkinson, Spilman Thomas and Battle, PLLC, Niall A Paul, Spilman Thomas and Battle, PLLC, Mark Philip Pifko, Baron & Budd, P.C. & Roland K. Tellis, Baron Budd, P.C.. Ford Motor Company, Defendant, represented by Amir M. Nassihi -- anassihi@shb.com -- Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P., Andrew L. Chang -- achang@shb.com -- Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P.,Christopher Scott McRae -- cmcrae@shb.com -- Shook, Hardy and Bacon L.L.P., pro hac vice, Dustin Alan Lane, Bowman and Brooke LLP, Michael Kevin Underhill -- kunderhill@shb.com -- Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP & Todd Andrew Croftchik, Bowman and Brooke LLP, pro hac vice. FOUR OAKS: Class Suit Stayed Pending Arbitration Motions -------------------------------------------------------- Four Oaks Fincorp, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that a class action lawsuit against the Bank has been stayed pending resolution of motions to compel arbitration filed by the Bank's co-defendants. In October 2013, multiple putative class action lawsuits were filed in United States district courts across the country against a number of different banks based on the banks' alleged role in "payday lending". Four of these lawsuits, filed in the Northern District of Georgia, the Middle District of North Carolina, the District of Maryland, and the Southern District of Florida, named the Bank as one of the defendants. The lawsuits allege that, by processing Automatic Clearing House transactions indirectly on behalf of "payday" lenders, the Bank is illegally participating in an enterprise to collect unlawful debts and is therefore liable to plaintiffs for damages under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. The lawsuits also allege a variety of state law claims. The Bank moved to dismiss each of these lawsuits. The Georgia action was voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiffs and the District of Maryland granted the motion and dismissed the case, which the parties subsequently settled while on appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The lawsuit in the Southern District of Florida has been stayed pending arbitration of the plaintiff's claims against the Bank's co-defendants. The Middle District of North Carolina granted the motion in part and denied it in part; the case against the Bank has been stayed pending resolution of motions to compel arbitration filed by the Bank's co-defendants. Four Oaks Bank & Trust Company was incorporated under the laws of the State of North Carolina in 1912. On February 5, 1997, the Bank formed Four Oaks Fincorp, Inc. for the purpose of serving as a holding company for the Bank. FOX INSTITUTE: Sued in Conn. Super. Ct. Over Employment Practices ----------------------------------------------------------------- SHARON KELSEY, and other similarly situated employees on the basis of disability; the Plaintiff, v. Fox Institute of Business, Inc., the Defendant, Case No. HHD-CV-16-6066811-S (Conn. Super. Ct., March 15, 2016), seeks to recover damages as a direct and proximate result of Defendant's violation of the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act. The Plaintiff has a physical disability. The Plaintiff underwent surgery to remove a portion of her colon and remove her uterus. She also received rectal seal repair and a pelvic floor lift. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff sustained emotional pain, suffering, embarrassment, shame, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life, impairment of her personal and professional reputation, damage caused by the Plaintiffs loss of insurances and savings and investment opportunities. The Plaintiff filed charges against defendant with the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities. Fox Institute was founded in 2003. The company's line of business includes schools offering courses in business machine operation, office procedures, and secretarial skills. The Plaintiff is represented by: James V. Sabatini, Esq. SABATINI & ASSOCIATES LLC 1 Market Square Newington, CT 06111 Telephone: (860) 667 0839 Facsimile: (860) 667 0867 E-mail: jsabatini@sabatinilaw.com GARDA CL: "Tessono" Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime Pay -------------------------------------------------- Ronald Tessono and Louis A. Florissant, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. Garda CL Atlantic, Inc., the Defendant, Case No. 2:16-cv-01276-SJF-AKT (E.D.N.Y., March 15, 2016), seeks to recover unpaid overtime premium pay and unpaid spread-of-hours premiums wages, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law. According to the complaint, the Defendant failed and/or refused to pay Plaintiffs overtime premium pay for hours worked in excess of 40 hours per work week. Garda CL was founded in 1996. The company's line of business includes providing detective, guard, and armored car services. The Plaintiff is represented by: Ann Ball, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF ANN BALL 357 Veterans Memorial Highway Commack, NY 11725 Telephone: (631) 864 8700 Facsimile: (631) 864 1415 E-mail: ann.ball@mac.com GARDA CL: "Moreno" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages ------------------------------------------ Bryan Moreno, Celso Gonzalez, and Oscar Sosa, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, and on behalf of the State of California and the workforce in the interest of the general 17 public, the Plaintiffs, v. Garda CL West, Inc., and Does 1-20, inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. RG16807542 (Cal. Super. Ct., March 15, 2016), seeks to unpaid wages and all available remedies, pursuant to Cal. Labor Code and California's Unfair Competition Law. According to the complaint, the Defendants allegedly failed to pay overtime, maintain accurate records, provide proper rest and meal, and reimburse work expenses. Garda CL was founded in 1996. The company's line of business includes providing detective, guard, and armored car services. The Plaintiff is represented by: Dan Siegel, Esq. Kevin Brunner, Esq. Sonya Mehta, Esq. EmilyRose Johns, Esq. SIEGEL: & YEE 499 14th Street, Suite 300 Oakland, California 94612 Telephone: (510) 839 1200 Facsimile: (510) 444 6698 E-mail: DanSiegel@siegelyee.com kevinbrunner@siegelyee.com sonyamehta@siegelyee.com EmilyRose@siegelyee.com GLOBAL PAYMENTS: Defending Class Suits Over Heartland Acquisition ----------------------------------------------------------------- Global Payments Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 6, 2016, for the quarterly period ended February 29, 2016, that the Company is defending a class action lawsuit related to its proposed acquisition of Heartland Payment Systems, Inc. The Company said, "Heartland, Heartland's board of directors, Global Payments, Data Merger Sub One, Inc. (a wholly owned subsidiary of Global Payments, which we refer to as "Data Merger Sub One") and Data Merger Sub Two, LLC (a wholly owned subsidiary of Global Payments, which we refer to as "Data Merger Sub Two") have been named as defendants in a putative class action lawsuit challenging the proposed acquisition of Heartland. The suit was filed in the New Jersey Superior Court, Mercer County, Civil Division, and is captioned Kevin Merchant v. Heartland Payment Systems, et al, L-45-16 (filed January 8, 2016). An amended complaint was filed on February 29, 2016." "The complaint alleges, among other things, that the directors of Heartland breached their fiduciary duties to Heartland stockholders by agreeing to sell Heartland for inadequate consideration, agreeing to improper deal protection terms in the merger agreement, failing to properly value Heartland, and filing a materially incomplete registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission. In addition, the complaint alleges that Heartland, Global Payments, Merger Sub One, and Merger Sub Two aided and abetted these purported breaches of fiduciary duty. The plaintiff seeks, among other things, an injunction barring the acquisition, rescission of the mergers or rescissory damages to the extent they have already been implemented, and an award of damages and attorney's fees. We believe the lawsuit is without merit." GRUPPO CHIARELLO: "Page" Suit Seeks Minimum Wage ------------------------------------------------ Katherine Page and Asja Sever, as individual and on behalf of others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. Gruppo Chiarello LLC, a California limited liability company; Serra Hospitality Group, LLC, a California limited liability company; Does 1-50, inclusive; and Chiarello Chiarello, an individual, the Defendants, Case No. CGC 16 550963 (Cal. Super. Ct., March 15, 2016), seeks to recover minimum wage compensation, overtime compensation, meal breaks and expenses under California Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order and the Labor Code. According to the complaint, the Defendants intentionally disregard the rights of the Plaintiffs in receiving all lawful wages for all hours worked and lawful meal and rest periods. The Defendants operate a restaurant in San Francisco, California. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Kelley Armstrong, Esq. Matthew P. Vandall, Esq. Matthew J, Wayne, Esq. THE ARMSTRONG LAW FIRM 302 Caledonia Street, Suite 4 Sausalito, CA 94965 Telephone: (415) 331 4400 Facsimile: (415) 331 4407 E-mail: kelly@thearmstronglawfirm.com matt@thearmstronglawfirm.com mwayne@thearmstronglawfirm.com HOBART SERVICE: Alcantar Supplements Bid for Class Certification ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Plaintiff in the lawsuit titled JOSELUIS ALCANTAR, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. HOBART SERVICE, a division of ITW FOOD EQUIPMENT GROUP, LLC, ITW FOOD EQUIPMENT GROUP, LLC, a Delaware limited liability corporation, and Does 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No. ED CV11-01600 PSG SP (C.D. Cal.), filed with the Court his supplemental memorandum of points and authorities in support of his motion for class certification. Mr. Alcantar contends that his case presents one question for certification: Is time Service Technicians ("STs") spend hauling the Defendants' tools and parts to and from the first and last job of the day compensable? He notes that the parties do not dispute the facts pertinent to this question. The Defendants uniformly do not compensate STs for the time spent transporting the inventory of parts and equipment to and from the first and last job site of the day unless the miles driven exceed a set amount, Mr. Alcantar tells the Court. He argues, among other things, that the Department Labor Standards Enforcement stated that while normal commute time is not compensable, if an employee transports "equipment, goods or materials for the employer," the time is "compensable." A copy of the Supplemental Memorandum is available at no charge at http://d.classactionreporternewsletter.com/u?f=wR0GUPDg The Plaintiff is represented by: Robin G. Workman, Esq. WORKMAN LAW FIRM, PC 177 Post Street, Suite 900 San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: (415) 782-3660 Facsimile: (415) 788-1028 E-mail: robin@workmanlawpc.com HUMPHREY RICH: Faces "Rojas-Rios" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT ------------------------------------------------------------- Freddy F. Rojas-Rios, on behalf of himself and all similarly situated individuals v. Humphrey Rich Construction Group, Inc., Dynamo Painting LLC, and Edgar Uriona Cabrera, Case No. 1:16-cv- 00847-APM (D. Col., May 5, 2016), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Defendants own and operate a construction company with their principal place of business located at 10200 Old Columbia Road, Suite K, Columbia, Maryland 21046. The Plaintiff is represented by: Virginia Rae Diamond, Esq. Rebekah Miller, Esq. Benjamin Douglas, Esq. ASHCRAFT & GEREL, LLP 4900 Seminary Road, Suite 650 Alexandria, VA 22311 Telephone: (703) 627-5510 Facsimile: (703)820-0630 E-mail: vdiamond@ashcraftlaw.com IDENTIV INC: "Ruggiero" Class Action Voluntarily Dismissed ---------------------------------------------------------- Identiv, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2016, for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2015, that the "Ruggiero" class action lawsuit filed in California has been dismissed. On December 7, 2015, the Company and certain of its present and former officers and directors were named as defendants in a putative class action lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, entitled Ruggiero v. Identiv, Inc., et al., Case No. 15-cv-05583. The complaint in that lawsuit alleged violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act of 1934 based on allegations that the Company made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose information in certain public filings and disclosures between 2013 and 2015. The complaint sought unspecified monetary damages, reasonable costs and attorneys' fees, and equitable and injunctive relief. On December 16, 2015, that lawsuit was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice. Identiv is a global security technology company that secures data, physical places and things. IDENTIV INC: Facing Shareholder Actions in N.D. Cal. ---------------------------------------------------- Identiv, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2016, for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2015, that between December 2015 and February 2016, a number of other shareholder lawsuits were filed. On December 16, 2015, the Company and certain of its present and former officers and directors were named as defendants in a putative class action lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, entitled Rok v. Identiv, Inc., et al., Case No. 15-cv-05775, alleging violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act of 1934. In addition, three shareholder derivative actions were filed between January and February 2016. On January 1, 2016, certain of the Company's present and former officers and directors were named as defendants, and the Company was named as nominal defendant, in a shareholder derivative lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, entitled Oswald v. Humphreys, et al., Case No. 16-cv-00241-JCS, alleging breach of fiduciary duty and abuse of control claims. On January 25, 2016, certain of the Company's present and former officers and directors were named as defendants, and the Company was named as nominal defendant, in a shareholder derivative lawsuit filed in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda, entitled Chopra v. Hart, et al., Case No. RG16801379, alleging breach of fiduciary duty claims. On February 9, 2016, certain of the Company's present and former officers and directors were named as defendants, and the Company was named as nominal defendant, in a shareholder derivative lawsuit filed in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda, entitled Wollnik v. Wenzel, et al., Case No. HG16803342, alleging breach of fiduciary duty, corporate waste, gross mismanagement, and unjust enrichment claims. These lawsuits generally allege that the Company made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose information in certain public filings and disclosures between 2013 and 2015. Each of the lawsuits seeks one or more of the following remedies: unspecified compensatory damages, unspecified exemplary or punitive damages, restitution, declaratory relief, equitable and injunctive relief, and reasonable costs and attorneys' fees. The Company intends to vigorously defend against these lawsuits. The Company cannot currently predict the impact or resolution of each of these lawsuits or reasonably estimate a range of possible loss, if any, which could be material, and the resolution of these lawsuits may harm its business and have a material adverse impact on its financial condition. Identiv is a global security technology company that secures data, physical places and things. INTERSTATE CLEANING: "Rodriguez" Removed Suit to Dist. Florida -------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit entitled Osmel Rodriguez and other similarly situated non-exempt employees v. Interstate Cleaning Corporation and John E. Brauch, Jr., Case No. 16-08642-CA-01, was removed from the 11th Judicial Circuit Court in Miami Dade, FL to the U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida (Miami). The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:16-cv-21597-KMW to the proceeding. The case alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Defendants operate a janitorial and maintenance company servicing shopping centers, and lifestyle centers. The Plaintiff is represented by: Brody Max Shulman, Esq. Jason Saul Remer, Esq. Tyler Aaron Stull, Esq. REMER & GEORGES-PIERRE, PLLC Courthouse Tower 44 West Flagler Street, Suite 2200 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 416-5000 Facsimile: (305) 416-5005 E-mail: bshulman@rgpattorneys.com jremer@rgpattorneys.com ts@rgpattorneys.com The Defendant is represented by: Robert Bleakley, Esq. M. Kristen Allman, Esq. THE BLEAKLEY BAVOL LAW FIRM 15170 N Florida Ave Tampa, FL 33613 Telephone: (813) 221-3759 Facsimile: (813) 221-3198 E-mail: rbleakley@bleakleybavol.com kallman@bleakleybavol.com INTREXON CORP: "Gibrall" Sues Over Share Price Drop --------------------------------------------------- Patrick M. and Deborah P. Gibrall, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Intrexon Corporation, Randal J. Kirk and Rick L. Sterling, Defendants, Case No. 3:16-cv-02457-RS (N.D. Cal., May 5, 2016), seeks to recover compensable damages caused by violations of federal securities laws, and pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Defendant Intrexon is a company incorporated under the laws of Virginia and headquartered in Germantown, Maryland and is into the field of synthetic biology. It maintains offices in South San Francisco, California. Kirk served as the Company Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and Director while Sterling served as the Chief Financial Officer. Defendants allegedly overstated Intrexon's revenue for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2015. Intrexon shares fell $9.73 per share or approximately 26% from its previous closing price to close at $27.10 per share on April 21, 2016. Investors such as the Plaintiff lost substantially. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jennifer Pafiti, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP 468 North Camden Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Telephone: (818) 532-6499 E-mail: jpafiti@pomlaw.com - and - Patrick V. Dahlstrom, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP Ten South La Salle Street, Suite 3505 Chicago, Illinois 60603 Telephone: (312) 377-1181 Facsimile: (312) 377-1184 Email: pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com - and - Peretz Bronstein, Esq. BRONSTEIN, GEWIRTZ & GROSSMAN 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4600 New York, NY 10165 Telephone: (212) 697-6484 Fax: (212) 697-7296 Email: peretz@bgandg.com JAVELIN MORTGAGE: Baltimore Court Rejects Injunction Bid -------------------------------------------------------- ARMOUR Residential REIT, Inc. (NYSE: ARR, ARR PrA and ARR PrB) ("ARMOUR") and JAVELIN Mortgage Investment Corp. (NYSE:JMI) ("JAVELIN") on April 1 announced that the Circuit Court for Baltimore City has denied a motion seeking to enjoin ARMOUR's completion of its previously announced tender offer to purchase, through its newly formed subsidiary, JMI Acquisition Corporation ("Acquisition"), all of the outstanding shares of common stock of JAVELIN ("JAVELIN Common Stock") for $7.18 per share in cash (the "Tender Offer"). The Court's order, entered in a putative class action captioned Stourbridge Investments Ltd. v. Staton, et al., (Case No. 24C16001542), denied a request for a preliminary injunction. On April 6, 2016, the Companies announced that ARMOUR has completed its $85.2 million cash acquisition of JAVELIN through a second-step merger. JIMMY MCDUFFIE: Faces "Scott" Suit in S.D. Ga. ---------------------------------------------- A lawsuit has been filed against Jimmy McDuffie. The case is captioned Brandon Tyler Cannon and Andrea Nicole Scott, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Jimmy McDuffie, in his official capacity as Effingham County Sheriff, and Donald White, the Defendants, Case No. 4:16-cv-00098-LGW-GRS (S.D. Ga., April 29, 2016). The Assigned Judge is Hon. Lisa G. Wood. The Effingham County Sheriff's Office has watched over and served the people of Effingham County since 1833. The Plaintiff is represented by: Justin D. Maines, Esq. Law Office of Justin Maines 114 Barnard Street, Suite 2C Savannah, GA 31401 Telephone: (912) 358 8485 Facsimile: (912) 231 1251 E-mail: jd@thenyelawgroup.com JOE TEX XPRESS: "Crump" Labor Suit Transferred to E.D. Tex. ----------------------------------------------------------- Kevin Crump, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Joe Tex Xpress, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 2:16-cv-00051 (N.D. Tex., March 11, 2016) has been transferred to the U.S. District Court for the District of East Texas on May 5, 2016, under Case No. 5:16-cv-00063-RWS-CMC. Defendant allegedly denied Plaintiff proper overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The suit seeks declaratory relief, unpaid overtime pay, liquidated and/or other damages, attorney's fees and costs. Joe Tex Inc is a transportation solution provider located at 619 W. Rutherford St. Mt. Vernon, TX 75457. Defendant employed Plaintiff as a sand coordinator. The Plaintiff is represented by: James M Loren, Esq. GOLDBERG & LOREN, PA 3102 Maple Avenue, Suite 450 Dallas, TX 75201 Tel: (954) 585-4878 Fax: (954) 585-4886 Email: jloren@lorenlaw.com The Defendant is represented by: Jay K Rutherford, Esq. Jackson Walker LLP 777 Main St., Suite 2100 Fort Worth, TX 76102 Tel: (817) 334-7246 Fax: (817) 334-7290 Email: jrutherford@jw.com JOHN WETZEL: Faces "Stradford" Suit in E.D. Penn. ------------------------------------------------- A lawsuit has been filed against John Wetzel. The case is captioned Lacey Stradford, William Nettles, Jesse Stroud, and William Scott, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. John Wetzel, Secretary Pennsylvania Department of Corrections (PADOC), the Defendant, Case No. 2:16- cv-02064-JS (E.D. Penn., April 29, 2016). The Assigned Judge is Hon. Juan R. Sanchez. PADOC is the Pennsylvania state agency that is responsible for the confinement, care and rehabilitation of approximately 51,000 inmates at state correctional facilities funded by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The Plaintiff is represented by: Su Ming Yeh, Esq. PA INSTITUTIONAL LAW PROJECT 718 Arch St., Cast Iron Bldg. Suite 304 South Philadelphia, PA 19106 Telephone: (215) 925 2966 Facsimile: (215) 925 5337 E-mail: smyeh@pailp.org KARL STORZ: Sued in Cal. Super. Ct. Over Use of Storz Morcellator ----------------------------------------------------------------- Julie Simmons and Mark Simmons, the Plaintiffs, v. Karl Storz Endoscopy-America, Inc., a California Corporation; Karl Storz Endovision, Inc., a Massachusetts Corporation; Karl Storz GMBH & Co. KG, a business entity form unknown, and Does 1-52, inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. BC613903 (Cal. Super. Ct., March 15, 2016), seeks recovery for loss of consortium, and such other relief for injuries suffered as a direct result of use of the Storz Morcellator during the Plaintiff's surgery. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff allegedly suffered bodily injuries and other damages as a direct and proximate result of the use upon and within her of a defective and unreasonably dangerous surgical instrument, the Storz Morcellator during the laparoscopic hysterectomy for the treatment of uterine fibroids. Morcellator is a surgical instrument used for division and removal of large masses of tissues during laparoscopic surgery. In laparoscopic hysterectomy the uterus is minced up, or morcellated, into smaller pieces inside the woman's belly cavity in order to extract from the abdomen. KS Endoscopy and KS Endovision designs, manufactures, markets, tests, promotes, sells and/or distributes Storz Morcellator. Karl Storz is the parent company of KS Endoscopy and KS Endovision. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Anne Andrews, Esq. John C. Thornton, Esq. Lila Razmara, Esq. ANDREWS & THORNTON 2 Corporate Park, Suite 110 Irvine, CA 92606 Telephone: (949) 748 1000 Facsimile: (949) 315 3540 E-mail: aa@andrewsthornton.com jct@andrewsthornton.com lr@andrewsthornton.com KENSINGTON PROFESSIONAL: Bid to Stay "Weisberg" Suit Denied ----------------------------------------------------------- In the case captioned JONATHAN WEISBERG, individually and on behalf of all similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. KENSINGTON PROFESSIONAL AND ASSOCIATES LLC, Defendant, Case No. CV 15-08532 DDP (AGRx) (C.D. Cal.), Judge Dean D. Pregerson denied Kensington Professional and Associates LLC's motion to stay the case pending the outcome of the case, Robins v. Spokeo, Inc. 742 F.3d 409 (9th Cir. 2014), cert. granted 135 S.Ct. 1892 (2015), which is pending before the United States Supreme Court. Judge Pregerson held that any decision regarding standing in Spokeo is not likely to be applicable to the case because the plaintiff, Jonathan Weisberg, does not allege statutory standing, or standing based on the mere alleged violation of a federal statute, but instead states his theory of actual, individual, concrete injury in the first amended complaint. A full-text copy of Judge Pregerson's May 3, 2016 order is available at https://is.gd/842Ue4 from Leagle.com. Weisbert brought the putative class action under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), on behalf of a putative nationwide class who received unsolicited calls on their cell phones from Kensington using an automatic telephone dialing system. Jonathan Weisberg, Plaintiff, represented by Adrian Robert Bacon, Law Offices of Todd Friedman PC, Suren N Weerasuriya -- sweerasuriya@ctsclaw.com -- Callahan Thompson Sherman and Caudill LLP & Todd M Friedman, Law Offices of Todd M Friedman PC. Kensington Professional and Associates LLC, Defendant, represented by Geoffrey M Gold -- ggold@ecjlaw.com -- Ervin Cohen and Jessup, Pantea M Yashar -- pyashar@ecjlaw.com -- Ervin Cohen and Jessup LLP, Beth-Ann E Krimsky -- beth-ann.krimsky@gmlaw.com -- Greenspoon Marder PA, pro hac vice & Lawren A Zann -- lawren.zann@gmlaw.com -- Greenspoon Marder PA, pro hac vice. KS RENOVATION: "Puma" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages ----------------------------------------------------------- Jorge Puma, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. KS Renovation Group Inc., James Zammit, and Sylvano [Lnu], Case No. 1:16-cv-02254 (E.D.N.Y., May 5, 2016), seeks to recover unpaid overtime, liquidated damages, and attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Defendants operate a construction company with a principle place of work located at, 9-19 38th Avenue, Long Island City, NY 11101. The Plaintiff is represented by: Anne Melissa Seelig, Esq. C.K. Lee, Esq. LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC 30 East 39th Street, 2nd Floor New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 465-1124 Facsimile: (212) 465-1181 E-mail: anne@leelitigation.com cklee@leelitigation.com LA MESA RV: "Hoffer" Suit to Recover Minimum Pay ------------------------------------------------ Meakin Hoffer, for himself and on behalf of those similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. LA Mesa RV Center, Inc, Defendants, Case No. 2:16-cv-00314-UA-CM (M.D. Fla., April 28, 2016), seeks to recover unpaid back-wages, declaratory relief, liquidated damages and attorney's fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. Defendant runs an RV sale company located in 9650 Kelly Tractor Drive, Fort Myers, Florida. It employed Hoffer as an RV salesman. Plaintiff was denied minimum wages. The Plaintiff is represented by: Angeli Murthy, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN, PA, Suite 400 600 N Pine Island Rd Plantation, FL 33324 Tel: (954) 967-5377 Fax: (954) 327-3016 Email: amurthy@forthepeople.com LANNETT CO: Faces "Diamond" Lawsuit Over Digoxin "Price Fixing" --------------------------------------------------------------- Nina Diamond, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Lannett Company, Inc., Impax Laboratories, Inc., West-Ward Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Allergan plc; Myland Pharmaceuticals, Inc., and Par Pharmaceutical Companies, Inc. Case 2:16-cv-02077-CMR (E.D. Pa., May 2, 2016), alleges a conspiracy to fix, maintain, and/or stabilize the prices of generic digoxin or doxycycline products. The Defendants are manufacturers and/or distributors of generic digoxin. The Plaintiff is represented by: Mindee J. Reuben LITE DEPALMA GREENBERG LLC 1835 Market St Suite 2700 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Phone: (267) 314-7980 E-mail: mreuben@litedepalma.com LEMON-X CORP: "Cuevas" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay ---------------------------------------------- Israel Cuevas and other similarly situated non-exempt employees, Plaintiff(s), v. Lemon-X Corporation and Kevin P. Kelly, Sr., Individually. Defendant(s), Case No. 8:16-cv-01117-VMC-MAP (Fla. Cir., May 5, 2016), seeks declaratory, injunctive, legal and equitable relief together with attorneys' fees, costs and damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. Defendant failed to compensate Plaintiff the required overtime and/or minimum wages at a rate of one and a half times Plaintiffs regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of forty within a single work week. Lemon-X provides quick serve and self-serve dispensing products, cocktail mixers and purees for restaurants. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jason S. Remer, Esq. Brody M. Shulman, Esq. REMER & GEORGES-PIERRE, PLLC 421 West Flagler Street, Suite 2200 Miami, FL 33130 Tel: (305) 416-5000 Fax: (305) 416-5005 Email: jremer@rgpattorneys.com LIBERTY ACQUISITIONS: No Arbitration for "Nelson" Suit ------------------------------------------------------ In the case captioned JASON NELSON AND GALEN LEITH, Appellees, v. LIBERTY ACQUISITIONS SERVICING LLC, LIBERTY ACQUISITIONS I LLC -- JEFFERY W. BUSCH AND MARK CANNON, RYAN BOLANDER, SCOTT SKEEN, AND BRIAN R. BECKER, Appellants, No. 20141004-CA (Utah Ct. App.), the Court of Appeals of Utah affirmed the district court's ruling that Liberty Acquisitions Servicing LLC had waived the right to enforce the arbitration clauses in the underlying credit card agreements by filing and pursuing debt collection actions. A full-text copy of the Court's May 5, 2016 opinion is available at https://is.gd/LL9Z3f from Leagle.com. After the cessation of Liberty Acquisitions' litigation efforts against them, Jason Nelson and Galen Leith brought suit against the debt collection company for violations of federal and state statutes governing debt collection practices. The complaint also named as defendants Brian R. Becker, Ryan Bolander, and Scott Skeen, three employees of Liberty Acquisitions. The complaint alleged that the defendants violated the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (the FDCPA) and the Utah Consumer Sales Practices Act (the UCSPA) by filing collection actions against Nelson and Leith despite the expiry of the time bar. Nelson and Leith also sought to bring their claims as a class action on behalf of an unspecified number of similarly situated individuals. Leith further asserted an individual claim against the defendants for violating the FDCPA and the UCSPA by serving a writ of garnishment on Leith's employer eleven or twelve days after the court dismissed the action against Leith with prejudice. Ronald F. Price, Attorney for Appellants. Lester A. Perry -- lap@hooleking.com -- Attorney for Appellees. LIFETIME ENTERTAINMENT: 2nd Circuit Appeal Lodged in "Leyse" Case ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mark Leyse, Appellee v. Lifetime Entertainment Services, LLC, Appellant, Case No. 16-1425 (2nd Cir., May 5, 2016), is an appeal from a lower court ruling in Case No. 13-cv-5794 (S.D.N.Y., Aug 16, 2013). Mark Leyse brought suit against Defendant Lifetime Entertainment Services, LLC for its alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991. Mark Leyse, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, is represented by: Todd C. Bank, Esq. TODD C. BANK, ATTORNEY AT LAW 119-40 Union Turnpike Kew Gardens, NY 11415 Tel: 718-520-7125 Lifetime Entertainment Services, LLC is represented by: Sharon L. Schneier, Esq. Edward John Davis, Esq. Eric Joel Feder, Esq. DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 1251 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020 Tel: 212-489-8230 212-603-6431 212-489-8230 LOS ANGELES HOUSING: Court Certifies Two Classes in "Nozzi" Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Hon. Percy Anderson granted the Plaintiffs' amended motion to certify class under Rules 23(b)(2) and 23(c)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in the lawsuit styled Michael Nozzi, et al. v. Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles, et al., Case No. CV 07-380 PA (FFMx) (C.D. Cal.). The Court certifies this class under Rule 23(b)(2): All Section 8 beneficiaries whose benefits are administered by the Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles and who in the past received, or in the future may receive, notices of a Voucher Payment Standard decrease. The Court certifies this class under Rule 23(b)(3): All Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles ("HACLA") Section 8 tenants, between June 1, 2005, and September 30, 2006, whose rental contribution for a period not to exceed eleven months was greater than it would have been but for Defendant HACLA's 2004 decrease in the Voucher Payment Standard. A copy of the Order is available at no charge at http://d.classactionreporternewsletter.com/u?f=K5AbEjtK LUCKY FLUKE: "Romero" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages Under FLSA -------------------------------------------------------- Juan Martinez Romero, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Lucky Fluke Corp. (d/b/a Wondee Siam II), Pamuan Likitsansook and Phimploy Likitsansook, the Defendants, Case No. 1:16-cv-01915-AKH (S.D.N.Y., March 15, 2016), seeks to recover unpaid minimum and overtime wages, liquidated damages, interest, attorneys' fees, and costs, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA) and the New York Labor Law. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff was employed as a delivery worker, but he was required to spend several hours each day performing non-tipped duties unrelated to deliveries, including but not limited to dishwashing, preparing food, assisting the cooks and cleaning. The Plaintiff regularly worked for Defendants in excess of 40 hours per week, without appropriate minimum wage and overtime compensation for any of the hours that he worked each week. Pamuan Likitsansook and Phimploy Likitsansook own and operate Wondee Siam II. The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Faillace, Esq. MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2540 New York, NY 10165 Telephone: (212) 317 1200 Facsimile: (212) 317 1620 E-mail: Faillace@employmentcompliance.com LUNA INNOVATIONS: Court Issued Final Order Approving Settlement --------------------------------------------------------------- Luna Innovations Incorporated said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the Court has issued a final order and judgment approving the settlement in the class action lawsuit related to a merger agreement. The Company said, "As a result of our merger with Advanced Photonix, Inc. ("API"), three separate putative class action complaints were filed on behalf of API stockholders against us and members of the API board of directors, API, and API Merger Sub. Two actions (captioned Clark v. Advanced Photonix, Inc., Case No. 15-169-CB and Panzer v. Advanced Photonix, Inc., Case No. 15-214- CB) were filed in the Circuit Court for the County of Washtenaw of the State of Michigan (the "Court") and one action (captioned Henderson v. Advanced Photonix, Inc., C.A. No. 10715) was filed in the Court of Chancery for the State of Delaware (collectively, the "Stockholder Litigation")." "In general, the plaintiffs in the Stockholder Litigation alleged that API's directors breached their fiduciary duties to API's stockholders by, among other things, agreeing to sell API to Luna at an inadequate price, implementing an unfair process, agreeing to certain provisions of the Merger Agreement that purportedly favored Luna and deterred alternative bids, and/or omitting material information from the Registration Statement on Form S-4 that we filed with the SEC in connection with the merger. The complaints also generally alleged that API and Luna aided and abetted the API directors' breaches of fiduciary duties. The complaints sought, among other things, an injunction against consummation of the merger and an award of costs and expenses, including a reasonable allowance for attorneys' and experts' fees. "In March 2015, the parties agreed in principle to settle the Stockholder Litigation by entering into a memorandum of understanding (the "MOU"). Under the terms of the MOU, API agreed to provide additional disclosures to its stockholders, which were included in an amendment to our Registration Statement on Form S- 4. "In October 2015, plaintiff in the Henderson action dismissed his case with prejudice, and the Court consolidated the Clark and Panzer actions (the "Consolidated Action"). In November 2015, the parties signed a Stipulation of Settlement and submitted it to the Court for approval. "On March 17, 2016, the Court issued a final order and judgment approving the settlement as set forth in the Stipulation and dismissing the Consolidated Action (the "Judgment"). The Judgment provides, among other things, a full release of all claims against the defendants related to the merger and an award of $250,000 in fees to plaintiffs' counsel. Luna Innovations Incorporated develops, manufactures and markets fiber optic sensing and test & measurement products focused on bringing new and innovative technology solutions to measure, monitor, protect and improve critical processes in the aerospace, automotive, energy, composite, telecommunications, and defense industries. MATT PAK: Sued in Ill. Cir. Ct. Over Release of Documents --------------------------------------------------------- Harold M. Hoffman, individually and on behalf of those similarly situated, the Petitioner, v. Matt Pak, Inc. and the Chicago Rabbinical Council, Inc., the Respondents, Case No. 2016-L-002708 (Ill. Cir. Ct., March 15, 2016), petitions the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Cook County, pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 204, for the issuance of Cook County Subpoenas for Documents to Respondents, Matt Pak, Inc. and the Chicago Rabbinical Council, Inc. According to the complaint, Hoffman is the plaintiff with respect to a matter pending in the Law Division of the Superior Court of Bergen County, New Jersey. The Respondents allegedly possess relevant documents with respect to the New Jersey action. The Respondents cannot be compelled to produce the relevant documents unless they are served with Cook County Subpoenas. The Petitioner is represented by: Evan Lincoln Moscov, Esq. MOSCOV LAW Cook County Attorney No. 49274 653 N. Kingsbury St., Suite 1501 Chicago, IL 60654 Telephone: 312-255 7996 E-mail: evan.moscov@moscov1aw.com MCCABE WEISBERG: Wright Seeks Certification of New Yorkers Class ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order determining that the action titled WILLIAM WRIGHT, on behalf of plaintiff and a class v. MCCABE, WEISBERG & CONWAY, P.C., Case No. 2:15-cv-04757- JFB-AYS (E.D.N.Y), may proceed as a class action against the Defendant under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The Plaintiff seeks to certify one class, defined as: (a) all natural persons with New York addresses (b) who were sent a letter in the form represented by Exhibit A (c) addressed to the same address as that of the mortgaged property (d) which property involves the ownership by the person of one or two dwelling units (condominiums and cooperative apartments are included) (e) which letter was sent on or after August 14, 2014, and (f) on or before September 3, 2015. The Defendant has been attempting to collect from the Plaintiff an alleged residential mortgage debt incurred for personal, family or household purposes, according to the Motion. The Plaintiff further asks the Court that Edelman, Combs, Latturner & Goodwin, LLC and Kleinman, LLC be appointed as class counsel. A copy of the Motion is available at no charge at http://d.classactionreporternewsletter.com/u?f=pdvespRF The Plaintiff is represented by: Tiffany N. Hardy, Esq. EDELMAN, COMBS, LATTURNER & GOODWIN, LLC 20 S. Clark Street, Suite 1500 Chicago, IL 60603 Telephone: (312) 739-4200 Facsimile: (312) 419-0379 - and - Abraham Kleinman, Esq. KLEINMAN LLC 626 RXR Plaza Uniondale, NY 11556-0626 Telephone: (516) 522-2621 Facsimile: (888) 522-1692 MICHAEL HARRISON: Faces "Masuda" Suit in D.N.J. ----------------------------------------------- Ana Lilia Masuda, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Michael Harrison, Stacy Fronapfel, and John Does 1-5, the Defendants, Case No. 2:16-cv- 02426-WJM-MF (D.N.J., April 29, 2016). The Assigned Judge is Hon. William J. Martini. The Plaintiff is represented by: David C. Ricci, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF DAVID C. RICCI, LLC 51 JFK PARKWAY FIRST FLOOR WEST SHORT HILLS, NJ 07078 Telephone: (973) 218 2627 Facsimile: (973) 206-6955 E-mail: dricci@njconsumerlawyer.com - and - Philip D. Stern, Esq. STERN THOMASSON LLP 150 Morris Avenue, 2nd Floor Springfield, NJ 07081-1329 Telephone: (973) 379 7500 Facsimile: (973) 532 0866 E-mail: philip@sternthomasson.com MISTRAS GROUP: Mediation Talks Failed, Class Action Pending ----------------------------------------------------------- Mistras Group, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 7, 2016, for the quarterly period ended February 29, 2016, that the parties in a class action lawsuit met with a mediator on April 5, 2016 but no resolution of the case was reached. In April 2015, two separate lawsuits were filed in California as purported class action lawsuits on behalf of current and former Mistras employees. The cases are David Kruger v Mistras Group, Inc., filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California and Edgar Viceral v Mistras Group, et al, pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Both cases were originally filed in California state court and were removed to the respective U.S. District Courts for the districts in which the state court cases were filed. These two cases have been consolidated, with Kruger dismissing his case and joining the Viceral case. As part of this consolidation, the claims in the Kruger case that were not part of the Viceral case were added to the Viceral case by the filing of an amended complaint. The consolidated case alleges violations of California statutes primarily, the California Labor Code, and seeks to proceed as a collective action under the U.S. Fair Labor Standards Act. The case is predicated on claims for allegedly missed rest and meal periods, inaccurate wage statements, and failure to pay all wages due, as well as related unfair business practices, and is requesting payment of all damages, including unpaid wages, and various fines and penalties available under California law. The parties met with a mediator on April 5, 2016 but no resolution of the case was reached, though the Company anticipates discussions regarding resolution may continue. The Company is currently unable to determine the likely outcome or reasonably estimate the amount or range of potential liability, if any, related to these matters, and accordingly, has not established any reserves for these matters. MUNCHKIN INC: Recalls Pacifiers and Clips Due to Choking Hazard --------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with Munchkin Inc., of Van Nuys, Calif., announced a voluntary recall of about 180,000 LatchTM lightweight pacifiers and clips. Consumers should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product. The clip cover can detach from the pacifier's clip, posing a choking hazard for young children. This recall involves Munchkin's Latch lightweight pacifiers and clips sold as a set. The pacifiers were sold in five styles: designer, rattle and heartbeat clips with 0m+ natural shape pacifiers, and designer and rattle clips with 6m+ orthodontic pacifiers. The designer pacifiers and clips 0m+ and 6m+ are in three color patterns: blue and white strips, orange and with white polka dots and pink with white polka dots. The rattle pacifiers and clips 0m+ and 6m+ are green with beads in the pacifier cover to make a rattle sound and have a polka dot strap. The heartbeat pacifiers and clips have a red, heart-shaped pacifier cover and red and white polka dots on the strap. The firm has received 10 reports (5 in the U.S. and 5 in Canada) of the clip cover detaching from the pacifier clip. No injuries have been reported. Pictures of the Recalled Products available at: https://is.gd/aApeSo The recalled products were manufactured in China and sold at Babies R Us, Target, Wal-Mart and other mass merchandisers, juvenile product, baby boutique and discount stores nationwide and online at amazon.com, munchkin.com and other website from March 2014 through March 2016 for between $11 and $15. Consumers should immediately take the clip away from young children and contact Munchkin for a free replacement Lightweight Pacifier pack with two pacifiers or a full refund. MURRIETA POLICE: Certification Bid Taken Under Submission --------------------------------------------------------- The Hon. Virginia A. Phillips has taken two matters in the lawsuit titled Jacqueline Elise Fenaroli v. Officer K. Stickleman, et al., Case No. EDCV 15-01699-VAP(KKx) (C.D. Cal.), under submission. The matters are the Defendants' motion to strike the class allegations contained in the Plaintiff's second amended complaint, and the Plaintiff's motion to certify class. Defendants in the case include the City of Murrieta, the Murrieta Police Department, several of its officers, and certain John Does. A copy of the Order is available at no charge at http://d.classactionreporternewsletter.com/u?f=5GX87VOP NAPLES FLORIDA: "Fox" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay --------------------------------------------- Robin Fox on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Naples Florida Vacation Homes, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 2:16-cv-00336-SPC-MRM (M.D. Fla., May 5, 2016), seeks to recover unpaid back wages and an additional equal amount as liquidated damages for herself and those who opt-in to this action, and reasonable attorney's fees and costs. Naples Florida Vacation Homes, LLC is a professional vacation rental manager specializing in catering to short-term vacationers offering full-service property management services, where Plaintiff worked for Defendant as reservation specialist/event coordinator. She claims to have been denied overtime compensation. The Plaintiff is represented by: Paul M. Botros, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN, PA Suite 400 600 N Pine Island Rd Plantation, FL 33324 Tel: (954) 327-5352 Fax: (954) 327-3017 Email: pbotros@forthepeople.com NATIONAL FOOTBALL: Faces "Scroggins" Suit in E.D. Penn. ------------------------------------------------------- A lawsuit has been filed against National Football League, Inc. The case is captioned Tracy Scroggins, Quinn Gray, and Danny Gorrer, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Rose Stabler, as spouse of the deceased Kenny Stabler, and Joseph Horn, the Plaintiffs, v. National Football League, Inc. (NFL), the Defendant, Case No. 2:16-cv-02058-AB (E.D. Penn., April 29, 2016). The Assigned Judge is Hon. Anita B. Brody. NFL owns and operates a football league in the United States and internationally. The Plaintiff is represented by: Phillip Timothy Howard, Esq. HOWARD & ASSOCIATES 2120 Killarney Way Suite 125 Tallahassee, FL 32309 Telephone: (850) 298 4455 NATIONAL FOOTBALL: Players Sue Law Firms Over Settlement Proceeds ----------------------------------------------------------------- Chris Randolph, writing for Courthouse News Service, reported that seven former NFL players claim in court that their former law firms are wrongly trying to capitalize on their individual settlements from the league's concussion litigation. Gale Sayers, Lem Barney, Thomas Skladany, Thomas Vaughn, Jerry Rush, Kenneth Callicutt and Eric Hipple sued five law firms in Eastern Pennsylvania Federal Court on April 27, alleging that the firms have or will file attorney's liens against unearned future proceeds of the players' individual monetary awards under the National Football League's concussion settlement agreement. The firms named as defendants are Hausfeld LLP; Zimmerman Reed LLP; Locks Law Firm LLC; Bondurant, Mixon & Elmore LLP; and Pope, McGlamry, Kilpatrick, Morrison & Norwood PC. The former players were part of a class-action lawsuit against the NLF for brain injuries allegedly suffered as a result of playing in the league. A settlement was reached for nearly $1 billion, and it was upheld by the Third Circuit on April 18. Each player had been represented by one of the defendant law firms, but all ended representation months ago "due to dissatisfaction for various reasons," their suit claims. They then hired Cummings, McClorey, Davis & Acho PLC (CMDA), a Michigan law firm, to pursue individual awards under the concussion settlement. After being relieved of their services, the defendant law firms filed, or "may assert," attorney's liens regarding the individual awards, which would "unjustly enrich defendants at plaintiffs' expense," the 24-page lawsuit claims. The defendant law firms represented the former players in their class action, but the players claim that, following that settlement, their attorneys did little to pursue individual monetary awards, which led to their firing. Following the class-action settlement, class members were allowed to file individual claims, which are separate from the class action, but "defendant laws firms have not only not completed substantive work, but have not advanced the plaintiffs' individual claims for monetary awards under the settlement agreement," the complaint states. The former players claim that filing a lien on future awards for work not performed amounts to "double dipping." They say that CMDA, their current firm, has instead been aggressive in pursuing the individual claims, "sending plaintiffs to neurologists and neuropsychologist for evaluation, reviewing medical records, evaluating potential claims with doctors, preparing documents for claim packages, communicating with physicians, and communicating with clients regarding their individual claims." The new firm is therefore solely entitled to a fee on recovery of individual awards, the former players allege. "The general sentiment of the plaintiffs is that they are angry that liens have been or have been threatened to be placed against future recovery on their individual claims for which virtually all of the work was done by the law firm of Cummings, McClorey, Davis & Acho, including sending them to the neurologists and much more," says Arthur Goldman, who represents the former players. "All of the plaintiffs feel that any legal fees off of the recovery on the individual claims should go to Mr. Acho's firm." Hausfeld LLP and Zimmerman Reed LLP, two of the defendant firms, did not immediately respond to requests for comment April 29 morning. Each former player, with the exception of Sayers, formerly played for the Detroit Lions. Sayers played for the Chicago Bears. NEW ORLEANS, LA: Court Narrows Claims in "Cain" Civil Rights Suit ----------------------------------------------------------------- Judge Sarah S. Vance granted in part and denied, in part, the judicial defendants' motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' claims in the case captioned ALANA CAIN, ET AL. v. CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, ET AL. Section: R(2), Civil Action No. 15-4479 (E.D. La.). A full-text copy of Judge Vance's May 3, 2016 order is available at https://is.gd/VI2gpf from Leagle.com. Alana Cain, Ashton Brown, Reynaud Variste, Reynajia Variste, Thaddeus Long, and Vanessa Maxwell filed the civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 seeking to declare the manner in which the Orleans Parish Criminal District Court collects post- judgment court costs from indigent debtors unconstitutional. According to the plaintiffs, the Criminal District Court and other, related actors maintain a policy of jailing criminal defendants who fail to pay their court costs solely because of their indigence. The Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, the thirteen judges, and the judicial administrator moved to dismiss, contending that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted because they are entitled to absolute and qualified immunity. Alana Cain, Ashton Brown, Reynaud Variste, Reynajia Variste, Thaddeus Long, Vanessa Maxwell, Plaintiff, represented by William Patrick Quigley, Loyola Law School Clinic, Alec George Karakatsanis -- alec@equaljusticeunderlaw.org -- Equal Justice Under Law, pro hac vice, Anna Lise Lellelid-Douffet, Law Office of Anna Lellelid, LLC & Emily Faye Ratner, Emily Faye Ratner, Attorney at Law. New Orleans City, Defendant, represented by Adam J. Swensek, City Attorney's Office, Cherrell Simms Taplin, City Attorney's Office, Churita H. Hansell, City Attorney's Office & Sharonda R. Williams -- swilliams@fishmanhaygood.com -- Fishman Haygood. Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, Robert J. Kazik, Judicial Administrator, Laurie A White, Benedict Willard, Keva Landrum- Johnson, Robin Pittman, Byron C. Williams, Camille Buras, Karen K. Herman, Darryl Derbigny, Arthur Hunter, Franz Zibilich, Harry E Cantrell, Defendants, represented by Dennis J. Phayer, Burglass & Tankersley, L.L.C., Celeste Brustowicz, Burglass & Tankersley, L.L.C., Christopher Kent Tankersley, Burglass & Tankersley, L.L.C. & Elizabeth A. Doubleday, Burglass & Tankersley, L.L.C.. Marlin N. Gusman, Orleans Parish Sheriff, Defendant, represented by Blake J. Arcuri, Usry, Weeks & Matthews, Freeman Rudolph Matthews, Usry, Weeks & Matthews, Inemesit U. O'Boyle, Chehardy, Sherman, Ellis, Murray, Recile, Stakelum & Hayes, LLP, James McClendon Williams, Chehardy, Sherman, Ellis, Murray, Recile, Stakelum & Hayes, LLP, Matthew Arthur Sherman, Chehardy, Sherman, Ellis, Murray, Recile, Stakelum & Hayes, LLP & Timothy R. Richardson, Usry, Weeks & Matthews. Tracey Flemings-Davillier, Court, Defendant, represented by Dennis J. Phayer, Burglass & Tankersley, L.L.C. & Celeste Brustowicz, Burglass & Tankersley, L.L.C.. Tracey Flemings-Davillier, Defendant, represented by Christopher Kent Tankersley, Burglass & Tankersley, L.L.C. & Elizabeth A. Doubleday, Burglass & Tankersley, L.L.C.. Dennis Waldron, Ad Hoc Judge Sect. D of the Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, Defendant, represented by Elizabeth A. Doubleday, Burglass & Tankersley, L.L.C.. Jeff Landry, Movant, represented by Emily G Andrews, Louisiana Department of Justice & Madeline S. Carbonette, Louisiana Department of Justice. NEWPORT CORPORATION: Amended Complaint Filed in "Chung" Action -------------------------------------------------------------- Newport Corporation said in its Form 8-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2016, that a putative class action complaint captioned Dixon Chung v. Newport Corp., et al., Case No. A-16-733154-C, was filed on March 9, 2016, in the District Court, Clark County, Nevada on behalf of a putative class of the Company's stockholders. The complaint names as defendants the Company, Parent, Merger Sub and certain current and former members of the Company's board of directors. The complaint alleges that the named directors breached their fiduciary duties to the Company's stockholders by agreeing to sell the Company through an inadequate and unfair process, which led to inadequate and unfair consideration, and by agreeing to unfair deal-protection devices. The complaint also alleges that the Company, Parent and Merger Sub aided and abetted the named directors' alleged breaches of their fiduciary duties. The complaint seeks injunctive relief, including to enjoin or rescind the Merger, monetary damages, and an award of attorneys' and other fees and costs, among other relief. On March 25, 2016, the plaintiff in the Chung action filed an amended complaint, which added additional allegations, including that the preliminary proxy statement for the Merger dated March 14, 2016 omitted material information. The amended complaint names as defendants the Company, Parent, Merger Sub and the members of the Company's board of directors. NEWPORT CORPORATION: Faces "Pincon" Class Action in Nevada ---------------------------------------------------------- Newport Corporation said in its Form 8-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2016, that a putative class action complaint captioned Hubert C. Pincon v. Newport Corp., et al., Case No. A-16-734039-B, was filed on March 25, 2016, in the District Court, Clark County, Nevada, on behalf of a putative class of the Company's stockholders. The complaint names as defendants the Company, Parent, Merger Sub and the members of the Company's board of directors. The complaint alleges that the directors breached their fiduciary duties to the Company's stockholders by agreeing to sell the Company through an inadequate and unfair process, which led to inadequate and unfair consideration, and by agreeing to preclusive deal-protection devices. The complaint also alleges that the directors breached their fiduciary duties to the Company's stockholders by failing to disclose all material information concerning the Merger in the preliminary proxy statement for the Merger dated March 14, 2016. The complaint further alleges that the Company, Parent and Merger Sub aided and abetted the directors' alleged breaches of their fiduciary duties. The complaint seeks injunctive relief, including to enjoin or rescind the Merger, and an award of attorneys' and other fees and costs, among other relief. NEW YORK TIMES: "Grant" Sues over Discrimination ------------------------------------------------ Ernestine Grant and Marjorie Walker, on behalf of themselves individually and on behalf of all similarly situated persons, Plaintiffs, v. The New York Times Company, Mark Thompson, in his individual and professional capacities and Meredith Levien, in her individual and professional capacities, Defendants, Case No. 1:16- cv-03175 (S.D.N.Y., April 28, 2016), seeks (i) an injunction and order permanently restraining Defendants, (ii) damages, (iii) prejudgment and post-judgment interest, (iv) liquidated damages, (v) liquidated damages pursuant to the New York Labor Law for loss of past and future income, wages, compensation, seniority, and other benefits of employment, (vi) non-monetary and/or compensatory damages, (vii) punitive damages, (viii) reasonable attorney fees and costs and such other and further relief for violation of the Equal Pay Act, New York State Human Rights Law, New York Executive Law, New York City Human Rights Law, New York City Administrative Code, New York Equal Pay Law and New York Labor Law. Grant and Walker are employed in the Advertising division at the Times and have experienced discrimination and were retaliated against, when they complained about such discrimination. Defendant allegedly favors younger, white and male employees. Grant and Walker are above 60 black, female employees of the Defendant. The New York Times Company is a domestic publishing company located at 620 Eighth Avenue, New York, New York 10018, with Mark Thompson as CEO. The Plaintiff is represented by: Douglas H. Wigdor, Esq. Lawrence M. Pearson, Esq. Elizabeth J. Chen, Esq. WIGDOR LLP 85 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10003 Telephone: (212) 257-6800 Facsimile: (212) 257-6845 Email: dwigdor@wigdorlaw.com lpearson@wigdorlaw.com echen@wigdorlaw.com NISSAN: Recalls Sentra 2013 Model --------------------------------- Starting date: April 25, 2016 Type of communication: Recall Subcategory: Car Notification type: Safety Mfr System: Seats And Restraints Units affected: 53774 Source of recall: Transport Canada Identification number: 2016178TC ID number: 2016178 On certain vehicles, installing a child seat in the front passenger seat could deform the seat belt bracket. This could cause the occupant classification system (OCS) sensor to fail to detect the installed child seat. In the event of a crash, the airbag would not be suppressed which would increase the risk of injury. Correction: Dealers will reinforce the seatbelt bracket and update both the air bag control unit and electronic control unit. Make Model Model year(s) affected ---- ----- ---------------------- NISSAN SENTRA 2013 NISSAN: Recalls Multiple Vehicle Models Due to Defective Airbag --------------------------------------------------------------- Starting date: April 25, 2016 Type of communication: Recall Subcategory: Car, SUV Notification type: Safety Mfr System: Seats And Restraints Units affected: 258170 Source of recall: Transport Canada Identification number: 2016179TC ID number: 2016179 On certain vehicles, a defect in the occupant classification system could allow an adult sitting in the front passenger seat to be classified as a child or an "empty seat". This would suppress the airbag, which could increase the risk of injury in a crash. Correction: For affected Altima, Maxima, Murano, Rogue and Sentra vehicles, dealers will reprogram the airbag control unit and the occupant classification system control unit. For affected Leaf, NV200, Pathfinder, Q50 and JX35/QX60 vehicles, dealers will replace the occupant classification system electronic control unit. Make Model Model year(s) affected ---- ----- ---------------------- NISSAN PATHFINDER 2013 NISSAN MAXIMA 2016 NISSAN ALTIMA 2013 NISSAN MURANO 2015 INFINITI JX35 2013 NISSAN NV200 2013 INFINITI Q50 2014 NISSAN LEAF 2013 NORTH MERRICK: "Mendoza" Suit Seeks Unpaid OT Under Labor Law ------------------------------------------------------------- Jose A. Mendoza, Froilan Sandoval and Jaime Sandoval, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. North Merrick Fruits, Inc. d/b/a Pat's Farms; Pasquale Tuosto; and any other related entities, the Defendants, Case No. 601974/2016 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., April 29, 2016), seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation pursuant to New York Labor Law and New York Codes, Rules and Regulations. According to the complaint, beginning in March 2010 and continuing through the present, Defendants have engaged in a policy and practice of requiring their employees to regularly work in excess of 40 hours per week, without providing proper overtime compensation as required by applicable state law. North Merrick is a fruit and vegetable market located in Merrick, New York. The Plaintiff is represented by: Brett R. Cohen, Esq. Jeffrey K. Brown, Esq. Michael A. Tompkins, Esq. LEEDS BROWN LAW, P.C. One Old Country Road, Suite 347 Carle Place, NY 11514 Telephone: (516) 873 9550 NORTHLAND GROUP: Faces "Zippel" Suit in E.D.N.Y. ------------------------------------------------ A lawsuit has been filed against Northland Group, Inc. The case is captioned Robert Zippel, individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Northland Group, Inc., the Defendant, Case No. 2:16-cv-02152 (E.D.N.Y., April 29, 2016). Northland Group provides business process outsourcing services focused on accounts. The Plaintiff appears pro se. NOVARTIS CORPORATION: "Dickerson" Suit Moved to Texas Dist. Ct. --------------------------------------------------------------- Elyse Dickerson, on behalf of herself, the Plaintiff, v. Novartis Corporation and Alcon Laboratories Inc., the Defendant, Case No. 1:15-cv-01980, was transferred from U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Texas (Fort Worth). The District of Texas assigned Case No. 4:16-cv-00305A to the proceeding. Novartis is a global healthcare company based in Switzerland that provides solutions to address the evolving needs of patients worldwide. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeremy Heisler, Esq. Alexandra Harwin, Esq. Andrew C Melzer, Esq. David W Sanford, Esq. Felicia M Medina, Esq. SANFORD HEISLER KIMPEL, LLP 1350 Avenue of the Americas, 31st Floor New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (646) 402 5650 Facsimile: (646) 402 5651 E-mail: jheisler@sanfordheisler.com aharwin@sanfordheisler.com amelzer@sanfordheisler.com fmedina@sanfordheisler.com The Defendants are represented by: Heather K McDevitt, Esq. WHITE & CASE 1155 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (212) 819 8200 E-mail: hmcdevitt@whitecase.com - and - Kerry Alan Scanlon, Esq. Jeremy White, Esq. KAYE SCHOLER LLP 901 Fifteenth St NW Washington, DC 20005-2327 Telephone: (202) 682 3500 E-mail: kscanlon@kayescholer.com jeremy.white@kayescholer.com - and - Darnell Stybel Stanislaus, Esq. David R Marriott, Esq. Evan R Chesler, Esq. CRAVATH, SWAINE & MOORE LLP 825 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (212) 474 1079 E-mail: dstanislaus@cravath.com dmarriott@cravath.com echesler@cravath.com NQ MOBILE: Final Order Approving Settlement Issued -------------------------------------------------- NQ Mobile Inc. said in its Form 20-F Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 6, 2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the court has issued a final order and judgment approving the settlement and dismissing a class action lawsuit with prejudice. The Company said,"On October 25, 2013, a putative shareholder class action lawsuit against our company, Kostuk v. NQ Mobile, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 13 CIV 12712 (D. Mass.), was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Shortly thereafter, six more putative shareholder class action suits against our company and certain current and former directors and officers of our company were filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York: Ho v. NQ Mobile, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 13 CIV 7608 (S.D.N.Y.) (filed on October 28, 2013); Ghauri v. NQ Mobile, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 13 CIV 7637 (S.D.N.Y.) (filed on October 29, 2013); Pang v. NQ Mobile, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 13 CIV 7685 (S.D.N.Y.) (filed on October 30, 2013); Hiller v. NQ Mobile, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 13 CIV 7713 (S.D.N.Y.) (filed on October 30, 2013); Gangaramani v. NQ Mobile, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 13 CIV 7858 (S.D.N.Y.) (filed on November 5, 2013); Martin v. NQ Mobile, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 13 CIV 8125 (S.D.N.Y.) (filed on November 14, 2013)." "On December 2, 2013, another putative shareholder class action suit against our company and certain current and former directors and officers of our company, Hsieh v. NQ Mobile, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 13 CIV 1048 (E.D. Tex.), was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. "On January 6, 2014, Kostuk v. NQ Mobile, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 13 CIV 12712 (D. Mass.), was voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff. On April 9, 2014, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York consolidated the six putative shareholder class action suits filed in that court under the caption, In re NQ Mobile, Inc. Securities Litigation, Civil Action No. 13 CIV 7608 (S.D.N.Y.) ("In re NQ Mobile, Inc. Securities Litigation"), and appointed a lead plaintiff. "On May 13, 2014, Hsieh v. NQ Mobile, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 13 CIV 1048 (E.D. Tex.), was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and was accepted by the Southern District of New York as related to the consolidated putative shareholder class action, In re NQ Mobile, Inc. Securities Litigation. "On July 21, 2014, the lead plaintiff in In re NQ Mobile, Inc. Securities Litigation filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint (the "Consolidated Complaint") against us, our former co-chief executive officer Henry Yu Lin, former co-chief executive officer Omar Sharif Khan, chief operating officer and acting chief financial officer Vincent Wenyong Shi, former chief financial officer Suhai Ji, former chief financial officer Kian Bin Teo (collectively the "NQ Defendants"), and our former auditors PricewaterhouseCoopers ZhongTian LLP and its affiliate, PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited. "Similar to the previously filed complaints, the Consolidated Complaint alleges that various press releases, financial statements and other related disclosures made by our company during the alleged class period contained material misstatements and omissions, in violation of the federal securities laws, and that such press releases, financial statements and other related disclosures artificially inflated the value of our company's ADSs. The Consolidated Complaint states that the lead plaintiff seeks to represent a class of persons who allegedly suffered damages as a result of their trading activities related to our ADSs from March 6, 2013 to July 3, 2014, and, similar to previous complaints filed in the putative class actions, alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. Sections 78(b) and 78t(a), and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, 17 C.F.R. Sec. 240.10b-5 (2013). "On March 3, 2015, we notified the court that the lead plaintiff and the NQ Defendants had reached an agreement in principle to settle the claims against the NQ Defendants for $5.1 million, subject to court approval. "On November 17, 2015, the court preliminarily approved the proposed settlement. On March 11, 2016, after holding a settlement fairness hearing, the court approved the proposed settlement and issued a final order and judgment approving the settlement and dismissing the case with prejudice. This settlement will not have a material impact on our financial statements as the settlement amount, except for applicable deductibles, is covered by insurance." NQ MOBILE: Still Defends "Finocchiaro" Class Action in N.Y. ----------------------------------------------------------- NQ Mobile Inc. said in its Form 20-F Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 6, 2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the Company continues to defend the "Finocchiaro" class action lawsuit. The Company said, "On August 14, 2015, a putative shareholder class action lawsuit, Finocchiaro v. NQ Mobile, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 15 CIV 06385 (S.D.N.Y.), was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against our company and certain of our former and current officers." "On September 3, 2015, plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint. On November 20, 2015, plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint against us, our former co-chief executive officer Omar Sharif Khan and our vice president of capital markets Matthew Mathison. "The Second Amended Complaint alleges that various press releases and other disclosures made by our company during the alleged class period contained material misstatements and omissions, in violation of the federal securities laws, and artificially inflated the value of our company's ADSs. The Second Amended Complaint states that the plaintiffs seek to represent a class of persons who allegedly suffered damages as a result of their trading activities related to our ADSs from November 1, 2013 to May 15, 2015, and alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. Sections 78(b) and 78t(a), and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, 17 C.F.R. Sec. 240.10b-5. "On January 19, 2016, the company, Khan and Mathison submitted a letter to the court pursuant to the presiding judge's individual practices to identify the bases for our anticipated motions to dismiss, or alternatively, to strike the Second Amended Complaint, and to request a pre-motion conference. "On January 20, 2016, Khan submitted a supplemental letter to the court. On January 26, 2016, plaintiffs submitted a letter to the court responding to the letters submitted by our company, Mathison and Khan, in which plaintiffs sought leave to amend the Second Amended Complaint. "On February 16, 2016, the court issued a ruling that plaintiffs should promptly file, if they can consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, a Third Amended Complaint and then comply with the notice and lead plaintiff provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. On March 3, 2016, plaintiffs filed a Third Amended Complaint. The action remains in its preliminary stages. We believe the case is without merit and intend to defend the action vigorously." NRA GROUP: Joseph Bernal Seeks Certification of FDCPA Class ----------------------------------------------------------- The Plaintiff in the lawsuit entitled Joseph Bernal, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. NRA GROUP, LLC, a Pennsylvania limited liability company, d/b/a National Recovery Agency, Case No. 1:16-cv-01904 (N.D. Ill.), moves the Court, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to certify a class. The complaint, filed on February 3, 2016, alleges that the Defendant's debt collection letter attempts to collect "Costs" at a flat 16% rate when it had no right to do so. The Plaintiff contends that the Defendant violates the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. In his amended motion, the Plaintiff moves for class certification, and asks that the Court allow him to represent a class of all persons similarly situated in the state of Illinois from whom the Defendant attempted to collect a delinquent consumer debt allegedly owed for a Six-Flags account, via a collection letter identical to the letter that is attached to the Complaint, as to which a percentage based charge for "Costs" had been added to the debt, from one year before the date of the complaint to the present. A copy of the Motion is available at no charge at http://d.classactionreporternewsletter.com/u?f=WWRjE26R The Plaintiff is represented by: David J. Philipps, Esq. Mary E. Philipps, Esq. Angie K. Robertson, Esq. PHILIPPS & PHILIPPS, LTD. 9760 S. Roberts Road, Suite One Palos Hills, IL 60465 Telephone: (708) 974-2900 Facsimile: (708) 974-2907 E-mail: davephilipps@aol.com mephilipps@aol.com angiekrobertson@aol.com OGLETHORPE POWER: Still Defends Patronage Capital Litigation ------------------------------------------------------------ Oglethorpe Power Corporation said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the Company continues to defend the patronage capital litigation. The Company said, "On March 13, 2014, a lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court of DeKalb County, Georgia, against us, Georgia Transmission and three of our member distribution cooperatives. Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on July 28, 2014. The amended complaint challenges the patronage capital distribution practices of Georgia's electric cooperatives and seeks to certify a defendant class of all but one of our 38 members. It was filed by four former consumer-members of four of our members on behalf of themselves and a proposed class of all former consumer-members of our members." "Plaintiffs claim that approximately 30% of all the defendants' total allocated patronage capital belongs to former consumer- members. Plaintiffs also allege that patronage capital owed to former consumer-members includes patronage capital allocated by us to our members but not yet distributed to our members. Plaintiffs claim that the patronage capital of former consumer-members held by defendants and the proposed defendant class should be retired immediately when the consumer-members end their membership by terminating service, or alternatively, according to a revolving schedule of no longer than 13 years from the date of its allocation and seek relief to effect such retirements. Plaintiffs further seek to require the defendants to adjust rates in order to establish and maintain reasonable reserves to fund patronage capital retirements on this basis. Plaintiffs also claim that defendants and the proposed defendant class should be required to adopt policies to periodically retire the patronage capital of all consumer-members on a revolving schedule of no longer than 13 years from the date of its allocation. Our first mortgage indenture restricts our ability to distribute patronage capital. "Although not expected, if we were ordered by the Court to make distributions of our patronage capital, our first mortgage indenture would require us to raise our rates to a level sufficient so that we could comply with the current patronage capital distribution restrictions, and the rate increases required to meet the Plaintiffs' demands would be significant for a period of years. "On August 20, 2014, a second patronage capital lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court of DeKalb County against us, Georgia Transmission, and two of our member distribution cooperatives. The case was filed by two current consumer-members of the two member distribution cooperatives named in the lawsuit. Similar to the above described litigation, this complaint challenges the patronage capital distribution practices of Georgia's electric cooperatives; however, one notable difference is that the first case, described above, seeks to bring claims on behalf of former members while this second case seeks to bring claims on behalf of current members. The plaintiffs allege that the defendants have (i) retained patronage capital for an unreasonably long period of time; (ii) conspired with each other to deprive consumer-members of their patronage capital; and (iii) breached bylaw provisions allegedly requiring that patronage capital be retired when the financial condition of the cooperative will not be impaired. The plaintiffs seek unspecified damages and equitable relief, including an order declaring that the defendants be required to retire patronage capital "according to a regular, reasonable revolving plan." "Similarly to the litigation described above, although not expected, if we were ordered by the Court to make distributions of our patronage capital, our first mortgage indenture would require us to raise our rates to a level where we could comply with current patronage capital distribution restrictions, and the rate increases required to meet the Plaintiff's demands could be significant for a period of years. The plaintiffs seek to certify three plaintiffs' classes but do not seek to certify a defendants' class. "In May 2015, the Superior Court judge for both patronage capital lawsuits appointed a special master to oversee all pre-trial issues relating to these cases, including motions to dismiss that we and the other defendants filed in connection with each lawsuit. In September, the special master issued proposed orders to the judge to grant our and the other defendants' motions to dismiss both patronage capital lawsuits on all counts. These orders have been challenged by the plaintiffs and remain subject to approval by the Court. If approved, the Court's decision to grant the motions to dismiss will be subject to appeal. "We intend to defend vigorously against all claims in the above- described litigation." Oglethorpe Power Corporation is a Georgia electric membership corporation (an EMC) incorporated in 1974 and headquartered in metropolitan Atlanta. IOt is owned by its 38 retail electric distribution cooperative members. OLD NATIONAL: Settlement of Merger Litigation Reached ----------------------------------------------------- Old National Bancorp said in its Form 8-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 1, 2016, that Old National Bancorp ("Old National") and Anchor BanCorp Wisconsin Inc. ("Anchor") anticipate that the proposed merger of Anchor with and into Old National (the "Merger") would occur on May 2, 2016. The closing remains subject to the adoption of the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated January 11, 2016, by and between Old National and Anchor (the "Merger Agreement") by the Anchor stockholders at the Special Meeting of Anchor Stockholders on April 29, 2016 and satisfaction of all other conditions described in the Merger Agreement. Proposed Settlement of Litigation Related to the Merger On February 25, 2016, a putative class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, by an individual purporting to be a stockholder of Anchor. The lawsuit is captioned Parshall v. Anchor Bancorp Wisconsin, Inc., et al., Case No. 16-CV-120 (W.D. Wis.), and alleges state law breach of fiduciary duty claims against the Anchor's board for, among other things, seeking to sell Anchor through an allegedly defective process, for an unfair price and on unfair terms. The lawsuit seeks, among other things, to enjoin the consummation of the Merger and damages. The complaint alleges that Old National aided and abetted the Anchor directors' breaches of fiduciary duty. The complaint also includes federal law claims alleging that the registration statement omitted certain material information. On March 31, 2016, the plaintiff and defendants entered into a memorandum of understanding (the "MOU") setting forth their agreement in principle to settle the litigation. While the defendants deny the allegations in the complaint, they have agreed to enter into the MOU to avoid the costs and disruptions of any further litigation and to permit the timely closing of the Merger. The MOU describes the terms that the parties have agreed to include in the settlement agreement, subject to confirmatory discovery by the plaintiff, and describes the actions that the parties will take or refrain from taking between the date of the MOU and the date that the settlement agreement is finally approved by the court. The MOU, among other things, requires supplemental disclosures that the defendants have included in the proxy statement and prospectus dated March 29, 2016. The MOU also provides that the settlement agreement will include an injunction against proceedings in connection with the complaint and any additional complaints concerning claims that will be covered by the settlement agreement. In addition, the MOU provides that the settlement agreement will include a release on behalf of the plaintiff, along with other members of the class of Anchor stockholders certified for purposes of the settlement agreement, in favor of the defendants and their related parties from any claims that arose from or are related to the Merger. The defendants have agreed to pay the plaintiff's attorneys' fees and expenses as awarded by the court, subject to court approval of the settlement agreement and the consummation of the Merger. There can be no assurance that the parties will ultimately enter into the settlement agreement or that the court will approve the settlement even if the parties were to enter into such settlement agreement. In such event, the MOU may be rendered null and void and of no force and effect. OMARA LLC: "Coleman" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay -------------------------------------------- Jacklyn Danku Coleman, Plaintiff, v. OMARA LLC and Sharif Omara, Defendants, Case No. 1:16-cv-01020 (N.D. Ohio, April 28, 2016), seeks compensatory and monetary damages for unpaid overtime compensation, unpaid wages, and/or liquidated damages, reasonable attorney fees and non-taxable costs and such other relief for violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Omara LLC is an Ohio corporation that operates Days Inn in Lakewood, Ohio. Defendants hired Danku Coleman as a night auditor at Cleveland Ramada Inn and then at Lakewood, Ohio Days Inn where Defendants employed Coleman as a Front Desk Clerk. Coleman booked reservations, answered the telephone, drove the motel's van, set- up breakfast in the lobby and did laundry often rendering in excess of 40 hours per workweek without overtime compensation. The Plaintiff is represented by: Peter C. Mapley, Esq. THE SPITZ LAW FIRM, LLC 25200 Chagrin Boulevard, Suite 200 Beachwood, OH 44122 Phone: (216) 291-4744 Fax: (216) 291-5744 Email: peter.mapley@spitzlawfirm.com OMG TACO CORP: "Hernandez" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay -------------------------------------------------- Alejandro Hernandez and Victor Guzman, on behalf of themselves individually, and on behalf of all others similarly-situated, Plaintiffs, v. OMG Taco Corp. II, Mohamed Alhidami and Sam Kaplan, individually, Defendants, Case No. 1:16-cv-02262 (E.D.N.Y., May 5, 2016) seeks damages and equitable relief for violation of the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Laws, as well as for breach of contract and unjust enrichment under New York Law. Defendants operate a Mexican Restaurant located at 213 Montrose Avenue, Brooklyn, New York 11206 where Plaintiffs prepped food, cooked, cleaned dishes and maintained the premises. They claim to have been denied overtime pay. Plaintiffs represented by: Louis Moshe Leon, Esq. BORRELLI & ASSOCIATES, PLLC 1010 Northern Blvd, Suite 328 Great Neck, NY 11021 Tel: (516) 248-5550 Fax: (516) 248-6027 Email: lml@employmentlawyernewyork.com PATTERSON COMPANIES: Sued in E.D.N.Y. Over Marketing Conspiracy --------------------------------------------------------------- Alexander Greenberg, DDS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Patterson Companies, Inc., Henry Schein, Inc., and Benco Dental Supply Co., the Defendants, Case No. 1:16-cv-01280 (E.D.N.Y., March 15, 2016), seeks to recover from Defendants all improper overcharges paid as a result of market conspiracy and seeks to prevent Defendants from continuing this conduct, thereby allowing entry of effective competitors into the market for Dental Supplies, resulting in lower prices in the future. According to the complaints, the Defendants allegedly conspired to maintain and extend their dominant collective market power in the market for distribution of Dental Supplies by acting in concert to unlawfully and artificially perpetuate entry costs of potential competitors and barriers to exit of current customers. Henry Schein, Inc. is the largest distributor of dental supplies in the United States. Henry Schein is incorporated in Delaware, and its principal place of business is in Melville, Long Island, New York. Patterson Companies, Inc. is the second largest distributor of dental supplies in the United States. Patterson is incorporated in Minnesota, and its principal place of business is in St. Paul, Minnesota. Benco is incorporated in Delaware, and its principal place of business is in Pittston, Pennsylvania. The Defendants sell dental supplies to dental practices and laboratories nationwide. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffery H. Squire, Esq. BRAGAR EAGEL & SQUIRE, P.C. 885 Third Avenue, Suite 3040 New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 308 5858 E-mail: squire@bespc.com PIERRE LANDSCAPE: Sued in Cal. Super. Ct. Over Unpaid Wages ----------------------------------------------------------- Pedro V. Sanchez, individually and on behalf of other persons similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Pierre Landscape, Inc. and Does 1-50, the Defendants, Case No. BC613747 (Cal. Super. Ct., March 15, 2016), seeks to recover penalties for wage statement violations, earned but unpaid vacation wages, and waiting time penalties under California Labor Code. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff and other members of the Vacation Pay Class are entitled to continuation of their wages, from the day their earned and unpaid but vested vacation wages were due upon termination until paid, up to a maximum of 30 days. As a result of Defendant's conduct, Plaintiff and other members of the Vacation Pay Class have suffered damages in an amount subject to proof to the extent they were not paid for all wages earned prior to termination. The Defendant operates a landscape construction and maintenance company in and throughout Southern California, working on private and public works projects. The Plaintiff is represented by: Kenneth A. Goldman, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH GOLDMAN, PC 15300 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 207 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Telephone: (818) 287 7689 Facsimile: (818) 287 7816 E-mail: ken@kengoldmanlaw.com - and - Sahag Majarian II, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF SAHAG MAJARIAN, II 18520 Ventura Boulevard Tarzana, CA 91356 Telephone: (818) 609 0807 PD LONG ISLAND: "Servius" Suit Seeks Gratuities Under Labor Law --------------------------------------------------------------- Marc Servius, Erver Michel, and Joseph Remy, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. PD Long Island Hotel Associates, LLC; Dow Pre II LLC; Murray Lee Dow II; Mark Rosinsky; Charles Anderson; Stephen R. Griffin; Reed E. Dow; Robert Levy; Lynn Decastro; and any other related entities, the Defendants, Case No. 604593/2015 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., April 29, 2016), seeks to recover unlawfully retained gratuities owed to Plaintiffs who are presently or were formerly employed by the Defendants, pursuant to Labor Law and the Hospitality Wage Order. According to the complaint, the Defendants engaged in a policy and practice of failing to pay the Service Charge to Plaintiffs and instead retained the money for their own benefit in violation of Labor Law. PD Long Island is a contractor in the Hotels (except Casino Hotels) and Motels industry. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey K. Brown, Esq. Michael A. Tompkins, Esq. Brett R. Cohen, Esq. LEEDS BROWN LAW, P.C. One Old Country Road, Suite 347 Carle Place, NY 11514 Telephone: (516) 873 9550 PETERBILT: Recalls 567 Vehicle 2016 Models Due to Noncompliance --------------------------------------------------------------- Starting date: April 26, 2016 Type of communication: Recall Subcategory: Truck - Med. & H.D. Notification type: Compliance Mfr System: Lights And Instruments Units affected: 2 Source of recall: Transport Canada Identification number: 2016181TC ID number: 2016181 Manufacturer recall number: 416-B Certain vehicles may not comply with the requirements of Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 108 - Lighting System and Retroreflective Devices. These vehicles may have been equipped with a switch that allows operators to turn off the daytime running light (DRL) while the vehicle is in motion, which is contrary to the requirements of the standard. No DRL illumination could render the vehicle less visible to other motorists and pedestrians during daylight hours, which could increase the risk of a crash causing injury and/or damage to property. Correction: Dealers will replace the existing DRL override switch with a spare switch and disable the override feature. Make Model Model year(s) affected ---- ----- ---------------------- PETERBILT 567 2016 PHILADELPHIA FINANCIAL: Suit by Fishman Insurance Trust Dismissed ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the case captioned YALE M. FISHMAN 1998 INSURANCE TRUST, Plaintiff, v. PHILADELPHIA FINANCIAL LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY F/K/A AGL LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY, et al., Defendants, No. 11-cv-1283 (S.D.N.Y.), Judge Thomas P. Griesa granted the defendants' motions to dismiss the plaintiff's Consolidated Amended Direct and Verified Complaint. A full-text copy of Judge Griesa's May 3, 2016 opinion is available at https://is.gd/4kaROt from Leagle.com. The Yale M. Fishman 1998 Insurance Trust, brought the putative class action on behalf of itself and others who held certain insurance products sold by Philadelphia Financial Life Assurance Company f/k/a AGL Life Assurance Company ("PFLAC"). These insurance products lost value due to exposure to the Ponzi scheme perpetrated by Bernard Madoff. Against PFLAC, the plaintiff brought claims of breach of fiduciary duty, common law fraud, breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, violation of New York General Business Law ("GBL") Sec. 349, gross negligence, negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and promissory estoppel. The plaintiff also brought derivative claims against numerous corporate and individual defendants on behalf of certain funds in which its money was ultimately invested. Yale M. Fishman 1998 Insurance Trust, Plaintiff, represented by David Avi Rosenfeld -- drosenfeld@rgrdlaw.com -- Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, Edward Y. Kroub, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, Lauren Elizabeth Karalis, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP, Mario Alba, Jr. -- malba@rgrdlaw.com -- Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP & Samuel Howard Rudman -- srudman@rgrdlaw.com -- Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP. AGL Life Insurance Company, Defendant, represented by Hutson Brit Smelley -- hutson.smelley@emhllp.com -- Edison, McDowell & Hetherington, LLP. Rye Select Broad Market Insurance Fund LP, Rye Select Broad Market Prime Fund LP, Rye Select Broad Market XL Fund LP, Tremont Opportunity Fund III, L.P., Defendants, represented by Richard Walker Trotter -- trotter@thsh.com -- Tannenbaum Helpern Syracuse & Hirschtritt LLP. Tremont Capital Management, Inc., Tremont Group Holdings, Inc., Tremont Partners, Inc., Rye Investment Management, Robert Schulman, Stephen Thomas Clayton, Defendants, represented by Seth M Schwartz -- seth.schwartz@skadden.com -- Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP. MassMutual Holding LLC, Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co., Defendant, represented by Michael Douglas Blanchard -- michael.blanchard@morganlewis.com -- Morgan, Lewis & Bockius & Carol Elisabeth Head, Bingham McCutchen LLP, pro hac vice. Oppenheimer Acquisiton Corp., Defendant, represented by David Adam Kotler -- david.kotler@dechert.com -- Dechert, LLP & Robert Warren Topp, Dechert LLP. KPMG LLP, Defendant, represented by Gary Frederick Bendinger -- gbendinger@sidley.com -- Sidley Austin LLP, Gazeena Kaur Soni -- gsoni@sidley.com -- Sidley Austin LLP & Gregory Gil Ballard -- gballard@sidley.com -- Sidley Austin LLP. Sandra L. Manzke, Defendant, represented by Carrie Ann Tendler -- carrie.tendler@kobrekim.com -- Kobre & Kim LLP, Jonathan David Cogan -- jonathan.cogan@kobrekim.com -- Kobre & Kim LLP & Maggie E. Sklar, Kobre & Kim, LLP, pro hac vice. Susan Hammond, Defendant, represented by Carrie Ann Tendler, Kobre & Kim LLP & Maggie E. Sklar, Kobre & Kim, LLP, pro hac vice. PHOENIX LIFE: Court Denies Bid to Certify "Shevlin" Suit -------------------------------------------------------- In the case captioned BRIAN S. SHEVLIN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. PHOENIX LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al., Defendants, Civil Action No. 09-6323 (MLC) (D.N.J.), Judge Mary L. Cooper denied without prejudice the plaintiff's motion to certify the action as a class action. The judge also denied without prejudice the defendants' cross motion to exclude J. Peter Duran's expert opinions, and directed the defendants to (1) move to exclude Duran's opinions anew; and (2) file a proper brief in support that is strictly limited to the issues they have raised concerning Duran's expert opinions. Judge Cooper stated that the plaintiffs may move anew for class certification -- and, if appropriate, for summary judgment on the issue of liability -- after the court resolves the defendants' potential new motion to exclude Duran's opinions. A full-text copy of Judge Cooper's May 3, 2016 memorandum opinion is available at https://is.gd/mP9Tcq from Leagle.com. The plaintiffs were issued life insurance policies by the defendants' predecessor entity, which was a mutual life insurance company. The plaintiffs alleged that, at a certain point after the predecessor was demutualized and converted to a stock company, the defendants began to receive unjustifiably large aggregate dividends to the detriment of the dividends to be paid to the predecessor's original policyholders. BRIAN S. SHEVLIN, KEITH P. SHEVLIN, ERIN R. TAYLOR, Plaintiffs, represented by STEPHEN SKILLMAN -- sskillman@szaferman.com -- SZAFERMAN, LAKIND, BLUMSTEIN & BLADER, P.C., ARNOLD CARL LAKIND -- alakind@szaferman.com -- SZAFERMAN, LAKIND, BLUMSTEIN, BLADER & LEHMANN, PC, DANIELLE DISPORTO, LEVY PHILLIPS KONINGSBERG, MARK A. FISHER -- mfisher@szaferman.com -- SZAFERMAN LAKIND BLUMSTEIN & BLADER PC & ROBERT GANNON STEVENS, JR. -- rstevens@szaferman.com - - SZAFERMAN LAKIND BLUMSTEIN & BLADER PC. THE PHOENIX LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, PHOENIX COMPANIES, INC., Defendants, represented by AARON HENRY GOULD -- agould@podvey.com -- PODVEY MEANOR & SHELDON M. FINKELSTEIN -- sfinkelstein@podvey.com -- PODVEY MEANOR CATENACCI HILDNER COCOZIELLO & CHATTMAN, PC. PLATINUM SUPPLEMENTAL: Certification of 2 "Flynn" Classes Sought ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Plaintiff in the lawsuit titled MICHAEL FLYNN, on behalf of plaintiff and the class as defined below v. PLATINUM SUPPLEMENTAL INSURANCE, INC., Case No. 4:16-cv-04087-SLD-JEH (C.D. Ill.), asks the Court to enter an order determining that Count I and II of the action may proceed as a class action against the Defendant. Mr. Flynn alleges violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act. He brings Count I on behalf of a class, consisting of (a) all persons (b) who, on or after a date four years prior to the filing of this action, and on or before a date 20 days following the filing of this action, (c) received calls from defendant on their cell phones, (d) placed using an automated dialer or a prerecorded or artificial voice. The Plaintiff brings Count II on behalf of a class, consisting of (a) all persons with phone numbers in the Illinois area codes (b) who, on or after a date three years prior to the filing of this action, and on or before a date 20 days following the filing of this action, (c) received calls from defendant on their cell phones, (d) placed using an automated dialer or a prerecorded or artificial voice. The Plaintiff also asks the Court to appoint Edelman, Combs, Latturner & Goodwin, LLC as counsel for the classes. A copy of the Motion is available at no charge at http://d.classactionreporternewsletter.com/u?f=NxSW60qf The Plaintiff is represented by: Daniel A. Edelman, Esq. Cathleen M. Combs, Esq. James O. Latturner, Esq. Emiliya G. Farbstein, Esq. EDELMAN, COMBS, LATTURNER & GOODWIN, LLC 20 S. Clark Street, Suite 1500 Chicago, IL 60603 Telephone: (312) 739-4200 Facsimile: (312) 419-0379 PROSKAUER ROSE: Faces "Dorrel" Suit Over Standford Scheme --------------------------------------------------------- Sandra Dorrell and Phillip A. Wilkinson, individually and on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Proskauer Rose, LLP and Thomas V. Sjoblom, Defendants, Case No. 3:16-cv-01152-C (N.D. Tex., April 28, 2016), seeks to recover actual and punitive damages, costs and expenses of suit including reasonable attorney fees for violation of the Texas Securities Act, for aiding and abetting, for breach of fiduciary duty, for fraud and for civil conspiracy. Stanford Financial allegedly operated a worldwide Ponzi scheme, and Proskauer and Sjoblom provided legal services to Stanford Financial. The Plaintiff is represented by: Edward C. Snyder, Esq. Jesse R. Castillo, Esq. CASTILLO SNYDER, P.C. 700 N. St. Mary's Street, Suite 405 San Antonio, TX 78205 Tel: (210) 630-4200 Fax: (210) 630-4210 Email: esnyder@casnlaw.com jcastillo@casnlaw.com - and - David N. Kitner STRASBURGER & PRICE, LLP 901 Main Street, Suite 4400 Dallas, TX 75202 Tel: (214) 651-4300 Fax: (214) 651-4330 Email: david.kitner@strasburger.com - and - Douglas J. Buncher, Esq. NELIGAN FOLEY, LLP Republic Center 325 N. St. Paul, Suite 3600 Dallas, TX 75201 Tel: (214) 840-5320 Fax: (214) 840-5301 Email: dbuncher@neliganlaw.com - and - Judith R. Blakeway, Esq. Merritt Clements STRASBURGER & PRICE, LLP 2301 Broadway San Antonio, TX 78215 Telephone: (210) 250-6000 Facsimile: (210) 250-6100 Email: judith.blakeway@strasburger.com merritt.clements@strasburger.com RAINERI CONSTRUCTION: Wendelle Emily Seeks Class Certification -------------------------------------------------------------- The Plaintiff in the lawsuit styled WENDELLE EMILY, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. RAINERI CONSTRUCTION, LLC, ANTHONY RAINERI & ASHLEY RAINERI, Case No. 4:15-cv-00282 (RLW) (E.D. Mo.), seeks class certification pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A copy of the Motion is available at no charge at http://d.classactionreporternewsletter.com/u?f=jdoC4GQj The Plaintiff is represented by: David S. Corwin, Esq. Bridget Halquist, Esq. SHER CORWIN WINTERS LLC 190 Carondelet Plaza, Suite 1100 St. Louis, MO 63105 Telephone: (314) 721-5200 Facsimile: (314) 721-5201 E-mail: dcorwin@scwstl.com bhalquist@scwstl.com - and - Mark Potashnick, Esq. WEINHAUS & POTASHNICK 11500 Olive Blvd., Suite 133 St. Louis, Mo 63141 Telephone: (314) 997-9150 Facsimile: (314) 997-9170 E-mail: markp@wp-attorneys.com - and - Eli Karsh, Esq. LIBERMAN, GOLDSTEIN & KARSH 230 South Bemiston, Suite 1200 St. Louis, MO 63105 Telephone: (314) 862-3333 Facsimile: (314) 862-0605 E-mail: elikarsh@aol.com RALPH LAUREN: Faces "Dennis" Suit Over Misleading Ads ----------------------------------------------------- COURTNEY DENNIS, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, vs. RALPH LAUREN CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, RALPH LAUREN RETAIL, INC., a Delaware corporation, and DOES 1- 20, inclusive, Defendants, Case 3:16-cv-01056-WQH-BGS (S.D. Cal., May 2, 2016), alleges false and misleading advertisement of "market" prices, and corresponding phantom "savings," on clothing and fashion apparel sold in its retail outlet stores in violation of California's Unfair Competition Laws, California Business & Professions Code, Violation of California's False Advertising Laws; California Business & Professions Code and Violations of California Consumer Legal Remedies Act. Defendants operate Ralph Lauren and related outlet Ralph Lauren Polo Factory stores as well as the ralphlauren.com website, and advertise, market, distribute, and/or sell clothing and clothing accessories in California and throughout the United States. The Plaintiff is represented by: Todd D. Carpenter, Esq. CARLSON LYNCH SWEET KILPELA & CARPENTER, LLP 402 West Broadway, 29th Floor San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: (619) 347-3517 Fax: (619) 756-6990 E-mail: tcarpenter@carlsonlynch.com - and - Edwin J. Kilpela, Esq. Gary F. Lynch, Esq. CARLSON LYNCH SWEET KILPELA & CARPENTER, LLP 1133 Penn Avenue 5th Floor Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Phone: (412) 322-9243 Fax: (412) 231-0246 E-mail: ekilpela@carlsonlynch.com glynch@carlsonlynch.com - and - Deval R. Zaveri, Esq. ZAVERI TABB, APC 402 W. Broadway, 29th Floor San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: (619) 398-4768 Fax: (619) 342-8020 E-mail: dev@zaveritabb.com RECREATIONAL EQUIPMENT: Violated California Disabled Persons Act ---------------------------------------------------------------- Ramon Pizzaro, on behalf of himself, and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Recreational Equipment, Inc. i/a REI, the Defendant, Case No. RG16813673 (Cal. Super. Ct., April 29, 2016), seeks to recover statutory damages and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, for violation of the anti- discrimination state statutes of California, the Unruh Civil Rights Act, California Code, and the California Disabled Persons Act. According to the complaint, the Defendants denied mobility impaired/wheelchair-bound persons the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, programs, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any of the REI stores. REI is a privately held American retail corporation selling outdoor recreation gear, sporting goods, and clothing via some retail stores in 36 states, catalogs, and the Internet. The Plaintiff is represented by: Evan J. Smith, Esq. BRODSKY & SMITH, LLC 9595 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 900 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Telephone: (877) 534 2590 Facsimile: (310) 247 0160 E-mail: esmith@brodsky-smith.com REDFROG ENTERPRISES: Recalls Fish Cake Products Due to Egg ---------------------------------------------------------- Starting date: April 26, 2016 Type of communication: Recall Alert sub-type: Food Recall Warning (Allergen) Subcategory: Allergen - Egg Hazard classification: Class 2 Source of recall: Canadian Food Inspection Agency Recalling firm: Redfrog Enterprises Ltd. Distribution: Alberta, British Columbia Extent of the product distribution: Retail CFIA reference number: 10555 Brand Common Size Code(s) on UPC name name ---- product --- ---- ------ ---------- Wang Fish 1 kg 2017.07.05 0 87703 11546 0 Korea Cake REGUS MANAGEMENT: Court Won't Reconsider Denial of Class Cert. -------------------------------------------------------------- In the case captioned CIRCLE CLICK MEDIA LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. REGUS MANAGEMENT GROUP LLC, et al., Defendants, Case No. 12-cv- 04000-EMC (N.D. Cal.), Judge Edward M. Chen denied the motion filed by the plaintiffs Circle Click Media LLC and CTNY Insurance Group for leave to file a motion for reconsideration of the court's March 11, 2016 order denying the plaintiffs' motion for class certification. A full-text copy of Judge Chen's May 5, 2016 order is available at https://is.gd/rLTVFO from Leagle.com. The plaintiffs sued Regus Management Group LLC, Regus Business Centre LLC, Regus PLC, and HQ Global Workplaces LLC (collectively, Regus) based on Regus's leasing practices. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that Regus regularly charged more than the monthly amount stated in Regus's Office Service Agreement (OSA) because Regus charges mandatory fees that are not adequately disclosed until after the lease is signed. Based on these allegations, the plaintiffs brought claims for violations of California's Unfair Competition Law (UCL), the California False Advertising Law (FAL), and unjust enrichment. Circle Click Media LLC, CTNY Insurance Group LLC, Plaintiffs, represented by Ali Ari Aalaei, Ari Law, P.C., Alyce Winn Foshee, Ari Law, P.C., Craig P Ramsdell, Ari Law, P.C. & S. Chandler Visher, Law Offices of S. Chandler Visher. Regus Management Group LLC, represented by Daniel Thomas Rockey -- daniel.rockey@bryancave.com -- Bryan Cave LLP, Meryl Macklin -- meryl.macklin@bryancave.com -- Bryan Cave LLP, Tracy Marie Talbot -- tracy.talbot@bryancave.com -- Bryan Cave LLP, Ali Ari Aalaei, Ari Law, P.C., Christopher John Schmidt -- cjschmidt@bryancave.com -- Bryan Cave LLP, pro hac vice, Darci F. Madden -- dfmadden@bryancave.com -- Bryan Cave LLP, pro hac vice, Kenneth Lee Marshall -- klmarshall@bryancave.com -- Bryan Cave LLP, Sara Ahmed, Bryan Cave LLP & Stephanie Ann Blazewicz -- stephanie.blazewicz@bryancave.com -- Bryan Cave LLP. Regus Business Centre LLC, Regus plc, HQ Global Workplaces LLC, represented by Meryl Macklin, Bryan Cave LLP, Tracy Marie Talbot, Bryan Cave LLP, Ali Ari Aalaei, Ari Law, P.C., Christopher John Schmidt, Bryan Cave LLP, pro hac vice, Daniel Thomas Rockey, Bryan Cave LLP, Darci F. Madden, Bryan Cave LLP, pro hac vice, Kenneth Lee Marshall, Bryan Cave LLP, Sara Ahmed, Bryan Cave LLP & Stephanie Ann Blazewicz, Bryan Cave LLP. CTNY Insurance Group LLC, Circle Click Media LLC, represented by Ali Ari Aalaei, Ari Law, P.C. & S. Chandler Visher, Law Offices of S. Chandler Visher. ROBERT BOSCH: Recalls Small Angle Grinders Due to Burn Hazard ------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with Robert Bosch Tool Corp., of Mount Prospect, Ill., announced a voluntary recall of about 91,000 Bosch small angle grinders (in addition, 18,000 were sold in Canada). Consumers should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product. The grinder can overheat while in use, causing the brush covers to melt and expose the end of the brush holder, posing a risk of burns to the consumer. This recall involves Bosch 1380 Slim small, 4.5-inch angle grinders with date codes 502 through 511. The model number and date codes are located on the name plate affixed to the underside of the grinder. The grinders are blue and silver with a black label and black and red control buttons. "BOSCH" is printed in red on the side of the product. The firm has received four reports of the grinders overheating. No injuries have been reported. Pictures of the Recalled Products available at: https://is.gd/1PbD8f The recalled products were manufactured in China and sold at Lowe's, Menards, The Home Depot and other home improvement, hardware stores nationwide and online at Amazon.com, HomeDepot.com, Lowes.com and Menards.com from March 2015 through November 2015 for between $50 and $200, depending on the model and whether it was sold in a combination package with other tools. Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled grinders and contact the firm to obtain a free repair. RODALE INC: Sept. 7 Final Hearing on "Courter-Owens" Settlement --------------------------------------------------------------- In the case captioned ROSE COULTER-OWENS, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. RODALE INC., Defendant, Case No. 2:14-cv-12688 (E.D. Mich.), Judge Robert H. Cleland issued an order granting preliminary approval of a class action settlement, conditionally certifying the settlement class, appointing a class representative, appointing class counsel, and approving the notice plan. For purposes of settlement only, Judge Cleland conditionally certified the following settlement class: "All persons with Michigan street addresses who, between July 1, 2009 and the date of Preliminary Approval, purchased a subscription to a Rodale Publication." Judge Cleland appointed Rose Coulter-Owens as class representative, and Jay Edelson, Ari J. Scharg, and Benjamin S. Thomassen of Edelson PC as class counsel for the settlement class. Final approval hearing will be held on September 7, 2016, at 10 a.m. at the United States District Courthouse at 526 Water Street, Port Huron, MI 48060. A full-text copy of Judge Cleland's May 3, 2016 order is available at https://is.gd/XODTc4 from Leagle.com. Rose Coulter-Owens, Plaintiff, represented by Alicia Elaine Hwang -- ahwang@edelson.com -- Edelson PC, Ari J. Scharg -- ascharg@edelson.com -- Edelson P.C., Benjamin Scott Thomassen -- bthomassen@edelson.com -- Edelson PC, Henry M. Scharg, John C. Ochoa, SmithAmundsen LLC & James Dominick Larry -- nlarry@edelson.com -- Edelson P.C.. Rodale, Inc., Defendant, represented by Anthony T. Eliseuson -- anthony.eliseuson@dentons.com -- Dentons US LLP, Carol G. Schley, Clark Hill PLC, Kristen C. Rodriguez -- kristen.rodriguez@dentons.com -- Dentons US LLP, Natalie J. Spears -- natalie.spears@dentons.com -- Dentons US LLP & Peter B. Kupelian -- pkupelian@clarkhill.com -- Clark Hill PLC. Attorney General Bill Schuette, Intervenor, represented by Joshua O. Booth, State of Michigan. ROSS STORES: Class Action Litigation Remains Pending ---------------------------------------------------- Ross Stores, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2016, for the fiscal year ended January 30, 2016, that "Like many retailers, we have been named in class action lawsuits, primarily in California, alleging violation of wage and hour laws and consumer protection laws. Class action litigation remains pending as of January 30, 2016." Ross Stores, Inc. and its subsidiaries operate two brands of off- price retail apparel and home fashion stores -- Ross Dress for Less(R) ("Ross") and dd's DISCOUNTS(R). SANTA FE NATURAL: Sued in M.D. Fla. Over Deceptive Trade Practice ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ashley Waldo, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Company, and Inc., Reynolds American, Inc., the Defendants, Case No. 6:16-cv- 00427-CEM-DAB (M.D. Fla., March 15, 2016), seeks to redress for Defendants' misleading and deceptive trade practices. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff and Class have been deceived by Defendants' advertising, labeling, and other statements characterizing Natural American Spirit cigarettes as 100% additive-free, natural and/or organic. In fact, these cigarettes were not less harmful, healthier or less carcinogenic. Rather, they were at least as dangerous and harmful as regular cigarettes, and Defendants were aware of this. Santa Fe Natural is an American tobacco manufacturer based in Santa Fe, New Mexico, known for its production of the premier Natural American Spirit cigarette brand. The Plaintiff is represented by: John Allen Yanchunis Sr., Esq. Keith R. Mitnik, Esq. Marisa Kendra Glassman, Esq. Scott Weinstein, Esq. Gegory d. Prysock, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN, PA 201 N Franklin St Fl. 7 Tampa, FL 33602-5157 Telephone: (813) 223 5505 Facsimile: (813) 223 5402 E-mail: jyanchunis@forthepeople.com kmitnik@forthepeople.com sweinstein@forthepeople.com mglassman@forthepeople.com gprysock@forthepeople.com SHASTA: Recalls Travel Trailers 2015 Models Due to Injury Risk -------------------------------------------------------------- Starting date: April 25, 2016 Type of communication: Recall Subcategory: Travel Trailer Notification type: Safety Mfr System: Accessories Units affected: 149 Source of recall: Transport Canada Identification number: 2016177TC ID number: 2016177 On certain travel trailers, the dinette table may not have adequate support in the lowered position. This condition may cause the table to fall between the dinette benches, which could increase the risk of injury. Correction: Dealers will install additional support pieces to the table. Make Model Model year(s) affected ---- ----- ---------------------- SHASTA 2015, 2015 STANLEY M. GLASER: Faces "Carbonell" Suit in S.D. Fla. ------------------------------------------------------ A lawsuit has been filed against Stanley M. Glaser. The case is captioned Rosa Elvia Carbonell, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Stanley M. Glaser, doing business as Glaser Organic Farms, the Defendant, Case No. 1:16-cv-21539-UU (S.D. Fla., May 1, 2016). The Assigned Judge is Hon. Ursula Ungaro. Stanley M. Glaser provides naturally grown organic produce and gourmet raw, vegan food. The Plaintiff is represented by: Victoria Mesa, Esq. MESA-ESTRADA LAW, P.A. Compson Financial Center 1880 North Congress Avenue, Suite 205 Boynton Beach, FL 33426 Telephone: (561) 880 8062 Facsimile: (561) 828 8359 E-mal: victoria@mesaestradalaw.com - and - Gregory Scott Schell, Esq. FLORIDA LEGAL SERICES, INC. Migrant Farmworker Justice Project P.O. Box 32159 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33420 Telephone: (561) 582 3921 Facsimile: (561) 582 4884 E-mail: Greg@Floridalegal.Org STAR SPORTS: Fails to Pay Wages on Time, "Escobar" Suit Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- Renato A. Del Cid Escobar, an individual, on behalf of the State of California, as a private attorney general, the Plaintiff, v. Star Sports Theatre Arts & Recreation Inc.; and Does 1-50, inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. BC613923 (Cal. Super Ct., March 15, 2016), seeks seeking penalties and other relief, award providing for payment of costs of suit, award of attorneys' fees for Defendant's violation of California Labor Code. According to the complaint, the Defendant's failure to provide timely wages according to Labor Code was all done on a regular and consistent basis. Star Sports offers educational, theater arts, and recreational enrichment programs to students. The Plaintiff is represented by: Eric B. Kingsley, Esq. Darren M. Cohen, Esq. KINGSLEY & KINGSLEY, APC 16133 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1200 Encino, CA 91436 Telephone: (818) 990 8300 Facsimile: (818) 990-2903 E-mail: eric@kingsleykingsley.com dcohen@kingsleykingsley.com STARBUCKS CORP: Chicago Suit Alleges Under-Filling of Iced Drinks ----------------------------------------------------------------- Jack Bouboushian, writing for Courthouse News Service, reported that a consumer class claims Starbucks' cold drinks are almost half ice and the coffee chain misrepresents the fluid ounces of its popular, and profitable, iced coffee and tea beverages. Lead plaintiff Stacey Pincus filed a class action against Starbucks Corp. in Northern Illinois Federal Court in Chicago on April 27. Starbucks, the largest coffee retailer in the world, makes a good deal of its money on cold coffee and tea drinks prepared in-store. In 2014, shaken iced tea drinks were the most profitable menu addition of the year, according to Pincus' lawsuit. The company offers three sizes of drinks -- Tall, Grande, Venti and Trenta -- which correspond to 12, 16, 24 and 30 fluid ounces, respectively. These fluid ounce measurements are advertised in the store. However, Pincus says that Starbucks customers who order cold drinks are actually getting far less than the advertised fluid ounces because the company fills a large portion of the cup with ice. "A Starbucks customer who orders a Venti cold drink receives only 14 fluid ounces of that drink -- just over half the advertised amount, and just over half the amount for which they are paying," the 29-page complaint states. "In the iced coffee example, a Starbucks customer who orders and pays for a Venti iced coffee, expecting to receive 24 fluid ounces of iced coffee based on Starbucks' advertisement and marketing, will instead receive only about 14 fluid ounces of iced coffee." Further, Starbucks charges more for cold drinks than for comparable hot drinks, despite giving cold-drink customers less of the product than hot-drink customers; in this way, Starbucks makes higher profits off its cold beverages, Pincus claims. "In essence, Starbucks is advertising the size of its cold drink cups on its menu, rather than the amount of fluid a customer will receive when they purchase a cold drink -- and deceiving its customers in the process," the class-action lawsuit states. Pincus suggests that Starbucks could serve its cold drinks in larger cups that would allow room to pour the advertised amount of beverage in the cup and still have room for ice. Pincus seeks to represent a class of all persons who purchased a cold drink from Starbucks in the last 10 years. She accuses Starbucks of breach of express warranty, breach of implied warrant of merchantability, negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment and fraud. The class is represented by Steven Hart -- shart@hmelegal.com -- with Hart, McLaughlin & Eldridge in Chicago. Starbucks did not immediately respond to a request for comment. SUNRISE SENIOR: Sued in Ohio Common Pleas Ct. Over Discrimination ----------------------------------------------------------------- Gay-Ann Alawode, 28129 Terrace Drive, North Olmstead, Ohio, 44070, and other similarly-situated employees, the Plaintiff, v. Sunrise Senior Living, LLC, 27819 Center Ridge Road, Westlake, Ohio 44145; CT Corporation System, 1300 East Ninth St., Cleveland, Oh 44114; Craig Rakune c/o Sunrise Senior Living, 27819 Center Ridge Rd., Westlake Ohio 44145; and Kelly Lane c/o Sunrise Senior Living 27819 Center Ridge Rd., Westlake Ohio 44145, the Defendants, Case No. CV-16-860475 (Ohio Ct. of Common Pleas, March 15, 2016), seeks an order requiring Defendants to restore Plaintiff to one of the positions to which she was entitled by virtue of her application and qualifications, and expunge her personnel file of all negative documentation; an award against each Defendant of compensatory and monetary damages to compensate Alawode for physical injury, physical sickness, lost wages, emotional distress, and other consequential damages, in an amount in excess of $25,000 per claim to be proven at trial; an award of punitive damages against each Defendant in an amount in excess of $25,000; an award of reasonable attorneys' fees and non-taxable costs for Alawode's claims as allowable under law; an award of taxable costs of this action; and an award of such other relief as this Court may deem necessary and proper. Sunrise Senior Living communities provide senior care service. The Plaintiff is represented by: Claire T. Wade, Esq. THE SPITZ LAW FIRM, LLC 25200 Chagrin Blvd., Suite 200 Beachwood, OH 44122 Facsimile: (216) 291 5744 Telephone: (216) 291 4744 E-mail: claire.wade@SpitzLawFirm.com SUNRUN INC: "Baker" Files Securities Class Action in Calif. ----------------------------------------------------------- Joe Baker, Carl Hayner and Ken Morris, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. Sunrun Inc., Lynn Jurich, Bob Komin, Edward Fenster, Jameson Mcjunkin, Gerald Risk, Steve Vassallo, Richard Wong, Beau Peelle, Eren Omer Atesmen, Reginald Norris, William Elmore, Foundation Capital VI, L.P., Foundation Capital Management Co. Vi, LLC, Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, Goldman, Sachs & Co., Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated, RBC Capital Markets, LLC Keybanc Capital Markets Inc., Suntrust Robinson Humphrey, Inc., and Does 1-25, inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. CIV538419 (Cal. Super. Ct., April 29, 2016), seeks to pursue remedies under the Securities Act of 1933. According to the complaint, the statements made by Defendants to the investing public in the Registration Statement and Prospectus misrepresented material facts about the business and operations of Sunrun including common stock in or traceable to Sunrun's August 5, 2015 initial public stock offering. Sunrun is a provider of residential solar electricity and operates the "second largest fleet of residential solar energy systems" in the United States. The Plaintiff is represented by: Francis A. Bottini, Jr., Esq. Albert Y. Chang, Esq. Yury A. Kolesnikov, Esq. BOTTINI & BOTTINI, INC. 7817 Ivanhoe Avenue, Suite 102 La Jolla, CA 92037 Telephone: (858) 914 2001 Facsimile: (858) 914 2002 E-mail: fbottini@bottinilaw.com achang@bottinilaw.com ykolesnikov@bottinilaw.com TEACHERS INSURANCE: Sued in S.D.N.Y. Over Retirement Plan Losses ---------------------------------------------------------------- Harold Jay Lefkowitz, individually and as Representative of a class of similarly situated individuals, and on behalf of the LIU Retirement Account, Retirement Plan, the Continuum Health Partners, Inc. Plan, the Cabrini Medical Center Plan, the Saint Barnabas Medical Center TDA Plan, the Mobilization for Youth Plan, the Yeshiva University plan and similar Plans managed by TIAA, the Plaintiffs, v. Teachers Insurance And Annuity Association (TIAA), the Defendant, Case No. 1:16-cv-01932 (S.D.N.Y., March 15, 2016), seeks to recover financial losses suffered by the TIAA retirement plans and to obtain remedial, injunctive and other equitable relief from Defendant based upon breaches of its fiduciary duty. According to the complaint, the Defendant has breached its fiduciary duties by engaging in expensive duplicative mailings to beneficiaries in retirement plans it administers, unnecessarily mailing individual monthly statements to beneficiaries in separate mailings, resulting in expenses paid by the plans that are unnecessary, unreasonable and excessive, and not disclosed to plan participants. The Defendant has been aware of the problem for years, yet has failed to take any remedial steps, despite repeated promises to correct the problem, and continues to waste literally millions of dollars on unnecessary mailings. TIAA (formerly TIAA-CREF) is a Fortune 100 financial services organization that is the leading retirement provider for people who work in the academic, research, medical and cultural fields. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Toby Golick, Esq. CARDOZO BET TZEDEK LEGAL SERVICES 55 Fifth Avenue, 11th Floor New York, NY 10003 Telephone: (212) 790 0240 Facsimile: (212) 790 0256 E-mail: tgolick@yu.edu TERRAFORM GLOBAL: Reviewing Class Action Litigations ---------------------------------------------------- TerraForm Global, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 4, 2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the Company is still in the preliminary stages of reviewing the allegations made in the complaints and, as a result, is unable to provide any assurances as to the ultimate outcome of such lawsuits or the impact of an adverse resolution. On October 23, 2015 and October 30, 2015, separate purported class action lawsuits were filed in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Mateo, against the Company, certain of its officers and directors, each of the underwriters of the Company's August 5, 2015 initial public offering (the "IPO") and SunEdison. On December 3, 2015, December 9, 2015 and January 4, 2016, separate purported class action lawsuits were filed in the same court and against the same defendants. One of the state actions was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice in February 2016. On October 29, 2015 and November 5, 2015, separate purported class action lawsuits were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against the same defendants. The class action plaintiffs assert claims under Sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. The class action complaints allege, among other things, that the defendants made false and materially misleading statements and failed to disclose material information in the Registration Statement for the IPO regarding SunEdison and its recent operating results and business strategy. Among other relief, the class action complaints seek class certification, unspecified compensatory damages, rescission, attorneys' fees, costs and such other relief as the applicable court should deem just and proper. The Company intends to defend the class action lawsuits vigorously. The Company is still in the preliminary stages of reviewing the allegations made in the complaints and, as a result, is unable to provide any assurances as to the ultimate outcome of such lawsuits or the impact of an adverse resolution. TEXAS: "Watson" Suit Over Traffic Cameras Remanded to State Court ----------------------------------------------------------------- The United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit vacated the district court's judgment on the putative class action filed by James H. Watson and remanded the case with instructions to the district court to remand the case to the Texas state court whence it came. The case is JAMES H. WATSON, And Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF ALLEN, TEXAS; CITY OF AMARILLO TEXAS; CITY OF ARLINGTON, TEXAS; CITY OF AUSTIN TEXAS; CITY OF BALCH SPRINGS TEXAS; CITY OF BALCONES HEIGHTS, TEXAS; CITY OF BASTROP, TEXAS; CITY OF BAYTOWN, TEXAS; CITY OF BEDFORD TEXAS; CITY OF BURLESON, TEXAS; CITY OF CEDAR HILL, TEXAS; CITY OF CLEVELAND, TEXAS; CITY OF CONROE, TEXAS; CITY OF COPPELL TEXAS; CITY OF CORPUS CHRISTI TEXAS; CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS; CITY OF DENTON, TEXAS; CITY OF DIBOLL, TEXAS; CITY OF DUNCANVILLE, TEXAS; CITY OF EL PASO TEXAS; CITY OF ELGIN, TEXAS; CITY OF FARMERS BRANCH, TEXAS; CITY OF FORT WORTH, TEXAS; CITY OF FRISCO TEXAS; CITY OF GARLAND TEXAS; CITY OF GRAND PRAIRIE TEXAS; CITY OF HALTOM CITY, TEXAS; CITY OF HUMBLE, TEXAS; CITY OF HURST, TEXAS; CITY OF HUTTO, TEXAS; CITY OF IRVING TEXAS; CITY OF JERSEY VILLAGE, TEXAS; CITY OF KILLEEN TEXAS; CITY OF LEAGUE CITY, TEXAS; CITY OF LITTLE ELM, TEXAS; CITY OF LONGVIEW, TEXAS; CITY OF LUFKIN, TEXAS; CITY OF MAGNOLIA, TEXAS; CITY OF MARSHALL TEXAS; CITY OF MESQUITE TEXAS; CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS; CITY OF PLANO TEXAS; CITY OF PORT LAVACA, TEXAS; CITY OF RICHARDSON, TEXAS; CITY OF RICHLAND HILLS, TEXAS; CITY OF ROANOKE, TEXAS; CITY OF ROUND ROCK, TEXAS; CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS; CITY OF SUGAR LAND TEXAS; CITY OF TOMBALL TEXAS; CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK TEXAS; CITY OF WATAUGA, TEXAS; CITY OF WILLIS, TEXAS; REDFLEX TRAFFIC SYSTEMS, INCORPORATED; AMERICAN TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS, INCORPORATED; AMERICAN TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS, L.L.C.; XEROX STATE & LOCAL SOLUTIONS, INCORPORATED, formerly known as ACS State & Local Solutions, Incorporated; STATE OF TEXAS, Defendants-Appellees, No. 15-10732 (5th Cir.). The putative class action challenges the use of red light cameras within Texas and, more specifically, Chapter 707 of the Texas Transportation Code, which is the legislation authorizing such cameras. The case was originally filed in state court and subsequently removed to federal court. The Fifth Circuit held that the case belongs in state court. A full-text copy of the Fifth Circuit's May 5, 2016 opinion is available at https://is.gd/UE8Quz from Leagle.com. TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS: "Huffman" Suit Status Hearing Set for July 25 ----------------------------------------------------------------- The Clerk of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois made a docket entry on May 6, 2016, in the case entitled Richard Huffman, et al. v. Transworld Systems, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:16-cv-03418 (N.D. Ill.), relating to a hearing held before the Honorable Sharon Johnson Coleman. The minute entry states that: -- Status hearing set for July 25, 2016, at 9:00 a.m.; -- Plaintiff's motion to certify class is entered and continued to the next status; -- The case is referred to Magistrate Judge Finnegan for discovery supervision as well as settlement discussions; -- Initial status report to be submitted to Magistrate Judge Finnegan. -- Parties shall not engage in discovery until dates are set by the magistrate judge. A copy of the Notification of Docket Entry is available at no charge at http://d.classactionreporternewsletter.com/u?f=HHjjbJWU TRINET GROUP: To Defend Against "Welgus" Securities Class Action ---------------------------------------------------------------- Trinet Group, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 1, 2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the Company intends to continue to defend itself vigorously against the "Welgus" Securities Class Action. On or about August 7, 2015, Howard Welgus, a purported stockholder of the Company, filed a putative securities class action lawsuit arising under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The case has not been certified as a class action, although it purports to be filed on behalf of purchasers of the Company's common stock between May 5, 2014 and August 3, 2015, inclusive. The name of the case is Welgus v. TriNet Group, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-03625. No stockholder other than Mr. Welgus submitted a motion for appointment as lead plaintiff to represent the putative class, and, on December 3, 2015, the Court appointed Mr. Welgus as lead plaintiff. On February 1, 2016, Mr. Welgus filed an amended complaint. The defendants named in the case are the Company and certain of its officers and directors, as well as General Atlantic, LLC, a significant shareholder, and formerly majority shareholder, of the Company. The amended complaint generally alleges that the Company caused damage to stockholders of the Company by misrepresenting and/or failing to disclose facts generally pertaining to alleged trends affecting health insurance and workers compensation claims. Under a stipulated briefing schedule approved by the Court, the Company intended to move to dismiss the amended complaint no later than April 11, 2016. The Company believes that it has meritorious defenses against this action and intends to continue to defend itself vigorously against the allegations of Mr. Welgus. TriNet Group Inc., or TriNet or the Company, is a provider of comprehensive human resources, or HR, solutions for small to midsize businesses, or SMBs, under a co-employment model. 4 stories TRIPLE-S MANAGEMENT: Joint Underwriting Assoc. Litigations Update ----------------------------------------------------------------- Triple-S Management Corporation said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the term to continue negotiations was extended until March 17, 2016, in the Joint Underwriting Association Litigations. On August 19, 2011, plaintiffs, purportedly a class of motor vehicle owners, filed an action in the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico against the Puerto Rico Joint Underwriting Association (JUA) and 18 other defendants, including TSP, alleging violations under the Puerto Rico Insurance Code, the Puerto Rico Civil Code, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) and the local statute against organized crime and money laundering. JUA is a private association created by law to administer a compulsory public liability insurance program for motor vehicles in Puerto Rico (CLI). As required by its enabling act, JUA is composed of all the insurers that underwrite private motor vehicle insurance in Puerto Rico and exceed the minimum underwriting percentage established in such act. TSP is a member of JUA. In this lawsuit, entitled Noem¡ Torres Ronda, et al v. Joint Underwriting Association, et al., plaintiffs allege that the defendants illegally charged and misappropriated a portion of the CLI premiums paid by motor vehicle owners in violation of the Puerto Rico Insurance Code. Specifically, they claim that because the defendants did not incur acquisition or administration costs allegedly totaling 12% of the premium dollar, charging for such costs constitutes the illegal traffic of premiums. Plaintiffs also claim that the defendants, as members of JUA, violated RICO through various inappropriate actions designed to defraud motor vehicle owners located in Puerto Rico and embezzle a portion of the CLI premiums for their benefit. Plaintiffs seek the reimbursement of funds for the class amounting to $406.6 million, treble damages under RICO, and equitable relief, including a permanent injunction and declaratory judgment barring defendants from their alleged conduct and practices, along with costs and attorneys' fees. Discovery has been completed. Since 2011, TSP has been defending this claim and, jointly with other defendants, has filed several pleas in connection with the certification of the class and the dismissal of the claim. On December 17, 2015, other three defendants filed a joint motion informing the court that said defendants are conducting negotiations to settle the claim and requested a 60-day period in other to continue the negotiations. Subsequently, the term to continue negotiations was extended until March 17, 2016. No further updates were provided in the Company's SEC report. Triple-S Management Corporation is one of the most significant players in the managed care industry in Puerto Rico, serving approximately 1,100,000 members, with a 25% market share in terms of premiums written in Puerto Rico for the nine-month period ended September 30, 2015. It has the exclusive right to use the Blue Cross and Blue Shield ("BCBS") name and mark throughout Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Costa Rica, the British Virgin Islands and Anguilla and over 50 years of experience in the managed care industry. TRIPLE-S MANAGEMENT: Discovery Ongoing in Blue Cross Litigation --------------------------------------------------------------- Triple-S Management Corporation said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that discovery is ongoing in the case, In re Blue Cross Blue Shield Antitrust Litigation. TSS is a co-defendant with multiple Blue Plans and the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association (BCBSA) in a multi-district class action litigation filed on July 24, 2012 that alleges that the exclusive service area (ESA) requirements of the Primary License Agreements with Plans violate antitrust law, and the plaintiffs in these suits seek monetary awards and in some instances, injunctive relief barring ESAs. Those cases have been centralized in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. Prior to centralization, motions to dismiss were filed by several plans, including TSS. The parties have filed several pleas and presented their position in argumentative hearings before the court in connection with the motion to dismiss, which was ultimately dismissed without prejudice by the court. Also, on April 6, 2015, plaintiffs filed suit in the United States District Court of Puerto Rico, which the Company believes does not preclude TSS' jurisdictional arguments. Discovery is ongoing. The Company has joined BCBSA in vigorously contesting these claims. Triple-S Management Corporation is one of the most significant players in the managed care industry in Puerto Rico, serving approximately 1,100,000 members, with a 25% market share in terms of premiums written in Puerto Rico for the nine-month period ended September 30, 2015. It has the exclusive right to use the Blue Cross and Blue Shield ("BCBS") name and mark throughout Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Costa Rica, the British Virgin Islands and Anguilla and over 50 years of experience in the managed care industry. TUMI STORES: Faces "Gomez" Suit in S.D. Fla. -------------------------------------------- A lawsuit has been filed against Tumi Stores, Inc. The case is captioned Andres Gomez, on his own behalf, and on behalf of all other individuals similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Tumi Stores, Inc., the Defendant, Case No. 1:16-cv-21526-KMW (S.D. Fla., April 29, 2016). The Assigned Judge is Hon. Kathleen M. Williams. The Tumi Store is located at 19501 Biscayne Boulevard in Aventura, Florida 33180. The Plaintiff is represented by: Scott Richard Dinin, Esq. Scott R. Dinin, P.A. 4200 NW 7th Avenue Miami, FL 33127 Telephone: (786) 431 1333 Facsimile: (786) 513 7700 E-mail: srd@dininlaw.com TWINGO LLC: Recalls Baby Carriers --------------------------------- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with TwinGo LLC, of Mclean, Va., announced a voluntary recall of about 4,000 Baby carriers (in addition, about 160 were sold in Canada). Consumers should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product. The Twin Go Original Carrier is an infant carrier designed to carry one or two babies against the caregiver's body at the waist. It is intended for babies that are from 10 to 45 pounds. "Twin Go" is printed on a label located on the front of the carrier and an 11-digit batch number is printed on a label sewn to the waistband. Batch numbers included in this recall: 23014024003, 01515026003, and 21615019001. They were sold in fabric that is black on the outside and blue or orange on the inside. The firm has received 13 reports of buckles breaking worldwide, including 10 in the U.S., one in Canada and two in the UK. No injuries have been reported. Pictures of the Recalled Products available at: https://is.gd/P0VlBE The recalled products were manufactured in China and sold at Boutique stores nationwide and online at Amazon.com and TwinGoCarrier.com from December 2014 through May 2016 for about $215. Consumers should immediately stop using the infant carrier and contact TwinGo for a free repair kit. A free replacement buckle will be provided with instructions. A repair video is also available at http://twingocarrier.com/pages/repairkit. U.S. QUALITY: "Harter" Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime Under FLSA ------------------------------------------------------------ Gregory Harter, individually and on behalf of all similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. U.S. Quality Furniture Services, Inc., the Defendant, Case No. 5:16-cv-00311-DNH-TWD (N.D.N.Y., March 15, 2016), seeks to recover unpaid overtime, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees and costs, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). According to the complaint, the Defendant utilizes a piece-rate pay policy that does not include any premiums for overtime hours worked. U.S. Quality is a third-party service provider that contracts directly with furniture retailers and/or their warranty companies to warehouse, distribute and repair furniture. The Plaintiff is represented by: Bernard R. Mazaheri, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN 20 N Orange Ave Ste 1600 Orlando, FL 32801 Telephone: (407)420 1414 E-mail: bmazaheri@forthepeople.com UBER TECHNOLOGIES: "Suarez" FLSA Suit Sent to Arbitration --------------------------------------------------------- In the case captioned ANTONIO SUAREZ, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Defendant, Case No. 8:16-cv-166-T-30MAP (M.D. Fla.), Judge James S. Moody, Jr. granted the defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration and Strike Class/Collective Allegations. The plaintiffs, who were drivers for Uber Technologies, Inc. during the relevant time, alleged that Uber misclassified them and other drivers as independent contractors, rather than as employees. As a result, the plaintiffs asserted the following claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"): they were not paid for all of the hours they actually worked; they were not paid at least the Federal minimum wage for each hour worked; and they were not paid overtime compensation for hours they worked in excess of forty hours in one week. The plaintiffs also brought claims under the Internal Revenue Code ("IRC") and the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act ("FDUTPA") that incorporate the same allegations of unpaid wages from the FLSA claims. Finally, the plaintiffs alleged a collective action on their FLSA claims and a class action on their FDUTPA and IRC claims. Uber moved to compel arbitration and strike the class/collective allegations based on arbitration agreements that each plaintiff executed in connection with their employment. Uber argued that the arbitration agreements are enforceable and cover the claims asserted in this action. Uber also moved to strike the class/collective allegations because the arbitration agreements state that the parties agree to resolve their disputes in arbitration on an individual basis only. Judge Moody found that the parties entered into valid and enforceable agreements to arbitrate questions of arbitrability. The judge also concluded that the arbitration provision at issue in the case is not unconscionable under Florida law. In light of the fact that the complaint was improperly brought as a collective/class action, Judge Moody exercised his discretion to dismiss the action so that the plaintiffs may submit their claims to arbitration on an individual basis. A full-text copy of Judge Moody's May 4, 2016 order is available at https://is.gd/pbh9Jn from Leagle.com. Antonio Suarez, Fernando Alegria, Hillary Mitchell, Judhit Santander, Plaintiffs, represented by Brandon J. Hill, Wenzel Fenton Cabassa, PA & Luis A. Cabassa, Wenzel Fenton Cabassa, PA. Uber Technologies, Inc., Defendant, represented by Courtney B. Wilson -- cwilson@littler.com -- Littler Mendelson, PC. UNITED STATES: Class Certification Sought in Suit v. Immigration ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Plaintiffs in two lawsuits -- DUNCAN ROY, et al. v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES; et al., Case No. CV 12-09012 BRO (FFMx) (C.D. Cal.); and GERARDO GONZALEZ, et al. v. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, an entity, et al., Case No. CV 13-04416 BRO (FFMx) (C.D. Cal.) -- ask the Court to certify a class and subclasses under Rules 23(b)(2) and 23(c)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The class and subclasses are defined as: (1) The Main Class (Judicial Determination Class) shall consist of: "All current and future persons who are subject to an immigration detainer issued by an ICE agent located in the Central District of California, where the detainer is not based upon a final order of removal signed by an immigration judge or the individual is not subject to ongoing removal proceedings"; (2) The First Subclass (Probable Cause Subclass) shall consist of: "All members of the Judicial Determination Class for whom ICE has issued an immigration detainer based solely on checks for the individual in government databases"; and (3) The Second Subclass (Statutory Subclass) shall consist of: "All members of the Judicial Determination Class for whom ICE did not issue an administrative warrant of arrest at the time it issued an immigration detainer." The Plaintiffs also ask the Court to appoint as counsel for the Class their counsel of record -- the ACLU Foundation of Southern California, the ACLU Immigrant Rights Project, the National Day Laborer Organizing Network, The National Immigrant Justice Center, and Kaye, McLane, Bednarski & Litt. The proposed class action addresses civil rights violations, beginning in October 2010 and continuing into the present, stemming from the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department's ("LASD") alleged practices of arresting and detaining people, solely on the basis of immigration detainers. The Court will commence a hearing on July 11, 2016, at 1:30 p.m., to consider the Motion. A copy of the Motion and a copy of the Notice of Motion are available at no charge at: * http://d.classactionreporternewsletter.com/u?f=4Ira5hz8 * http://d.classactionreporternewsletter.com/u?f=9OXubYRs The Plaintiffs are represented by: Peter J. Eliasberg, Esq. Ahilan Arulanantham, Esq. Peter Bibring, Esq. Jennifer Pasquarella, Esq. Katherine Traverso, Esq. ACLU FOUNDATION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 1313 West 8th Street Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 977-9500 Facsimile: (213) 977-5299 E-mail: peliasberg@aclu-sc.org jpasquarella@aclu-sc.org - and - Barrett S. Litt, Esq. Lindsay B. Battles, Esq. KAYE, MCLANE, BEDNARSKI & LITT 234 Colorado Boulevard, Suite 230 Pasadena, CA 91101 Telephone: (626) 844-7600 Facsimile: (626) 844-7670 E-mail: blitt@kmbllaw.com lbattles@kmbllaw.com - and - Chris Newman, Esq. Jessica Karp Bansal, Esq. NATIONAL DAY LABORER ORGANIZING NETWORK 675 South Park View Street, Suite B Los Angeles, CA 90057 Telephone: (213) 380-2214 Facsimile: (213) 380-2787 E-mail: newman@ndlon.org jbansal@ndlon.org - and - Omar C. Jadwat, Esq. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION IMMIGRANTS' RIGHTS PROJECT 125 Broad Street, 18th floor New York, NY 10004 Telephone: (212) 549-2660 E-mail: ojadwat@aclu.org - and - Cecillia D. Wang, Esq. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION IMMIGRANTS' RIGHTS PROJECT 39 Drumm Street San Francisco, CA 94111 E-mail: cwang@aclu.org - and - Mark M. Fleming, Esq. NATIONAL IMMIGRANT JUSTICE CENTER 208 S. LaSalle Street, Suite 1300 Chicago, IL 60604 Telephone: (312) 660-1628 Facsimile: (312) 660-1505 E-mail: mfleming@heartlandalliance.org UNITED STATES: Just Compensation Ruling Entered ----------------------------------------------- In the case captioned ST. BERNARD PARISH GOVERNMENT AND OTHER OWNERS OF REAL PROPERTY IN ST. BERNARD PARISH OR THE LOWER NINTH WARD OF THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS, Plaintiffs, v. THE UNITED STATES, Defendant, No. 05-1119 L (Fed. Cl.), Judge Susan G. Braden issued a memorandum opinion and partial final judgment for just compensation, and order regarding class certification and appointment of class counsel. On May 1, 2015, the court issued a Memorandum Opinion And Order determining that the plaintiffs established that the Army Corps of Engineers' ("Army Corps") construction, expansions, operation, and failure to maintain the Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet ("MR-GO") caused increased storm surge flooding on the plaintiffs' properties during Hurricane Katrina and subsequent hurricanes and severe storms, effecting a temporary taking under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. On May 6, 2015, the court convened a settlement conference in New Orleans, during which the parties discussed mediation or certification of the court's liability decision. On October 9, 2015, the Government advised the court that it declined to pursue mediation. Instead, on October 30, 2015, the Government filed a Motion To Certify Interlocutory Appeal of the liability decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. On November 16, 2015, The plaintiffs filed a Response In Opposition. The parties, however, subsequently agreed that the most appropriate procedure to afford appellate review was for the court to enter a final partial judgment, pursuant to Rule 54(b) of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims, as to Just Compensation due the owners of 11 properties selected by the plaintiffs and the Government. A full-text copy of Judge Braden's May 4, 2016 memorandum opinion and partial final judgment is available at https://is.gd/BE48gp from Leagle.com. ST. BERNARD PARISH GOVERNMENT, Plaintiff, represented by Charles J. Cooper -- ccooper@cooperkirk.com -- Cooper & Kirk, PLLC. USA, Defendant, represented by William James Shapiro, U.S. Department of Justice. VINOCE VINEYARDS: Aug. 2 Case Management Conference Set ------------------------------------------------------- In the case captioned J & J SPORTS PRODUCTIONS, INC., Plaintiff, v. BRIAN EDWARD NUSS, et al., Defendants, Case No. 16-cv-02202-CW (N.D. Cal.), Judge Claudia Wilken set the Case Management Conference to August 2, 2016, at 2:30 P.M. in Courtroom 2, 4th Floor, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, CA 94612. A Case Management Statement will be due seven days prior to the conference. The Defendants in the case are Brian Edward Nuss, Lori Brussock Nuss and Vinoce Vineyards, LLC. A full-text copy of Judge Wilken's May 5, 2016 order is available at https://is.gd/CZIVi5 from Leagle.com. J & J Sports Productions, Inc., Plaintiff, represented by Thomas Peter Riley, Law Offices of Thomas P. Riley, P.C.. VIOLIN MEMORY: Final Settlement Approval Hearing Set for July 26 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Violin Memory, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 6, 2016, for the fiscal year ended January 31, 2016, that a court has set a Final Approval Hearing for July 26, 2016. The Company said, "Beginning on November 26, 2013, four putative class action lawsuits were filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California naming us and a number of our present or former directors and officers, and the underwriters of our September 27, 2013 initial public offering (the "IPO"). The four complaints were consolidated into a single, putative class action, and on March 28, 2014, the plaintiffs filed a consolidated complaint purporting to assert claims under the federal securities laws, based upon seven categories of alleged omissions, on behalf of purchasers of our common stock issued in the IPO." "The parties have reached a settlement that, if approved by the Court, will fully resolve the claims brought by plaintiffs on behalf of the class they seek to represent. The proposed settlement establishes a settlement fund of $7.5 million in return for a release of all claims in this matter. The settlement fund will be paid by our insurance carrier and will not result in any additional expense us. "On March 16, 2016, the Court granted plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement and set a Final Approval Hearing for July 26, 2016. Pursuant to the Court's Preliminary Approval Order, notice and claim forms will be mailed to class members and class members will have an opportunity to submit claims, to opt-out of the settlement, and/or object to the settlement. At the final approval hearing, the Court will consider the notice process and results, any objections and other relevant information. The Court will then decide whether to finally approve the class settlement. If the settlement is approved, the settlement funds will be disbursed as provided in the settlement agreement and the Court's orders." VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Farnbauch" Suit in S.D. Ind. ----------------------------------------------------- A lawsuit has been filed against Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. The case is captioned David L. Farnbauch, individually and representative of all similarly situated individuals, the Plaintiff, v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., doing business as: Volkswagen of America, Inc., a Corporation, the Defendants, Case No. 1:16-cv-00973-TWP-DKL (S.D. Ind., April 29, 2016). The Assigned Judge is Hon. Tanya Walton Pratt. Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in Herndon, Virginia. The Plaintiff is represented by: Crystal D. Pulley, Esq. MCCLURE MCCLURE & DAVIS 235 N. Delaware Street Indianapolis, IN 46204 Telephone: (317) 221 0800 Facsimile: (317) 221 0900 E-mail: crystal@pulleylaw.com VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Sherfey" Suit Remanded to Lorain County Court ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the case captioned CHAD SHERFEY, ET AL., Plaintiff, v. VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF AMERICA, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:16CV776 (N.D. Ohio), Judge Christopher A. Boyko denied the defendant's motion to stay and granted the plaintiffs' motion to remand the case to the Lorain County Court of Common Pleas on the condition that the plaintiffs first file a separate stipulation on the amount of damages signed by all plaintiffs. A full-text copy of Judge Boyko's May 3, 2016 opinion and order is available at https://is.gd/UJuQfT from Leagle.com. The complaint was filed by Chad Sherfey and approximately 80 other named plaintiffs against Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. on February 26, 2016 in Lorain County Court of Common Pleas alleging violations of the Ohio Consumer Sales Practices Act, fraudulent concealment, breach of implied warranty, rescission and restitution and punitive damages. According to the Complaint, Volkswagen made material misrepresentations concerning the fuel efficiency and emissions of certain VW models sold to the named plaintiffs. Chad Sherfey, Barbara Simpson, Mark Farlow, Dennis Gadley, Sharon Sheets, David Smart, George Rector, Raymond Stephen, Dennie Rogers, Raymond Belt, Glenda Prewitt, Harry Rosenfeldt, Monica Angelone, Warren Coleman, William Harris, Sidney King, Alanna Lane, Patricia Renaud, Patty Seink, Andrew Snow, Glen Spalding, Andrew Wang, Carl Weisfelder, Barry Hanenkratt, Ryan Curtis, Michael Suchecki, Brian Campbell, Jeremiah Grumbling, Peter Foradas, Jeremy Hinesman, Donald Leonard, Suzan Petrova, Charles Schmitz, Colin Urling, Thomas Walters, Randall Wilson, Patricia Williams, Fred Uhlmann, Christine Pyscher, Carol Richardson, Michael Black, Matthew Chambers, Sunny Hyde, John Rose, Mitchell Schott, Dave Winnestaffer, Shiloe Steinmetz, Everett Ritchie, William Heidl, Kenneth Skotniski, William Nichols, Greg Barton, Jeff Butler, Alan Hale, Zachary Cutright, Boley Greenwood, Ryan Henricks, Stephen Von Gunten, Joe Timmons, Kevin Armstrong, Troy Finley, Mark Gocala, Byron Jackson, Mike Duniec, Randall Panter, Mark Pinskey, Cecelia Green, John Brown, Tia Bryan, Edgar Gerdeman, John Moran, Ron Soeder, Becky Worthington, Keith Ricker, Ben Cooper, Jason Jones, Ed Fetro, Greg Goodson, Marjorie Kountz, Ian Rose, Greg Weiland, Julian Worthy, Ronald Nehlen, II, James Blank, Robert Wallace, Plaintiff, represented by David G. Utley -- dutley@cruglaw.com -- Collins, Roche, Utley & Garner, Gregory H. Collins -- gcollins@cruglaw.com -- Collins, Roche, Utley & Garner & Taylor Christopher Bartlett -- taylor@hgdlawfirm.com -- Heninger Garrison Davis Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., Defendant, represented by Hugh J. Bode -- hbode@reminger.com -- Reminger & Reminger. VONAGE AMERICA: "Merkin" Suit Sent to Arbitration ------------------------------------------------- In the case captioned ARTHUR MERKIN; JAMES SMITH, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, and on behalf of the general public, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. VONAGE AMERICA, INC., Defendant-Appellant, No. 14-55397 (9th Cir.), the United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's denial of Vonage America, Inc.'s motion to compel arbitration. A full-text copy of the Ninth Circuit's May 4, 2016 memorandum is available at https://is.gd/i3gnwb from Leagle.com. In the putative class action, Arthur Menkin and James Smith alleged that Vonage violated California law by charging certain fees in connection with its Voice over Internet Protocol service. Vonage filed a motion to compel arbitration pursuant to its Terms of Service. WALGREENS BOOTS: Appeal in Class Action Lawsuit in Early Stage -------------------------------------------------------------- Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 5, 2016, for the quarterly period ended February 29, 2016, that the appeal by a purported class member to a class action settlement is in an early stage. On December 5 and 12, 2014, putative shareholders filed class actions in federal court in the Northern District of Illinois against the Walgreens Board of Directors, Walgreen Co., and Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc. arising out of the Company's definitive proxy statement/prospectus filed with the SEC in connection with the special meeting of Walgreens shareholders on December 29, 2014. The actions asserted claims that the definitive proxy statement/prospectus was false or misleading in various respects. On December 23, 2014, solely to avoid the costs, risks and uncertainties inherent in litigation, and without admitting any liability or wrongdoing, Walgreens entered into a memorandum of understanding with the plaintiffs in both actions, pursuant to which Walgreens made certain supplemental disclosures. The proposed settlement was subject to, among other things, court approval. On July 8, 2015, the Court preliminarily approved the settlement, and on November 20, 2015, the Court entered an order of final approval of the settlement. On December 17, 2015, a purported class member who had objected to the settlement appealed the Court's order. The appeal was docketed with the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, and is in an early stage. WALGREENS BOOTS: Still Defends Securities Case in Illinois ---------------------------------------------------------- Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 5, 2016, for the quarterly period ended February 29, 2016, that the Company continues to defend a securities class action lawsuit in Illinois. On April 10, 2015, a putative shareholder filed a securities class action in federal court in the Northern District of Illinois against Walgreen Co. and certain former officers of Walgreen Co. The action asserts claims for violation of the federal securities laws arising out of certain public statements the Company made regarding its former fiscal 2016 goals. On June 16, 2015, the Court entered an order appointing a lead plaintiff. Pursuant to the Court's order, lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint on August 17, 2015, and defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint on October 16, 2015. Lead plaintiff filed a response to the motion to dismiss on December 22, 2015, and defendants filed a reply in support of the motion on February 5, 2016. WALGREENS BOOTS: Class Suits Over Rite Aid Merger Pending --------------------------------------------------------- Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 5, 2016, for the quarterly period ended February 29, 2016, that each of the class action lawsuits related to the merger with Rite Aid is still pending. On October 27, 2015, Walgreens Boots Alliance entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger with Rite Aid Corporation ("Rite Aid") and Victoria Merger Sub, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Walgreens Boots Alliance (the "Merger Agreement"), pursuant to which we agreed, subject to the terms and conditions thereof, to acquire Rite Aid, a drugstore chain in the United States with 4,560 stores in 31 states and the District of Columbia as of the date of the most recent Rite Aid Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. The Merger Agreement was approved by Rite Aid stockholders in February 2016. The transaction is expected to close in the second half of calendar year 2016, subject to regulatory approvals and other customary closing conditions. As of February 29, 2016, the Company was aware of ten putative class action lawsuits (the "Rite Aid actions") filed by purported Rite Aid stockholders against Rite Aid and its board of directors, Walgreens Boots Alliance and Victoria Merger Sub, Inc. for claims arising out of the transactions contemplated by the Merger Agreement (the "Rite Aid Transactions"). Eight of the Rite Aid actions were filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (the "Delaware actions"), one Rite Aid action was filed in the State of Pennsylvania in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County (the "Pennsylvania action"), and one Rite Aid action was filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (the "federal action"). The Delaware actions and the Pennsylvania action primarily allege that the Rite Aid board of directors breached its fiduciary duties in connection with the Rite Aid Transactions by, among other things, agreeing to an unfair and inadequate price, agreeing to deal protection devices that preclude other bidders from making successful competing offers for Rite Aid, and failing to disclose all allegedly material information concerning the proposed merger; and also allege that Walgreens Boots Alliance and Victoria Merger Sub, Inc. aided and abetted these alleged breaches of fiduciary duty. The federal action alleges, among other things, that Rite Aid and its board of directors disseminated an allegedly false and misleading proxy statement in connection with the Rite Aid Transactions. The Delaware actions were consolidated, and plaintiffs filed a motion for expedited proceedings and a motion for preliminary injunction seeking to enjoin the Rite Aid shareholder vote on the Rite Aid Transactions. The plaintiffs in the federal action also filed a motion for preliminary injunction seeking to enjoin the same Rite Aid shareholder vote. All such motions were denied, and the Rite Aid shareholders approved the Rite Aid Transactions at a special meeting on February 4, 2016. Each of the Rite Aid actions is still pending. WARREN UNILUBE: "Jones" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay Under FLSA ---------------------------------------------------------- Lisa Marie Jones, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Warren Unilube, Inc., and John Massel, Defendants, Case No. 5:16-cv-00264 (W.D. Tex., March 15, 2016), seeks to recover overtime pay required by the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). According to the complaint, the Defendant required and/or permitted the Plaintiff to work in excess of 40 hours per week but refused to compensate them properly for such hours. Warren Unilube produces lubricants and automotive chemicals. The Plaintiff is represented by: James M. Loren, Esq. George Z. Goldberg, Esq. Rachael Rustmann, Esq. GOLDBERG & LOREN, PA 3102 Maple Ave, Suite 450 Dallas, TX 75201 Telephone: (800) 719 1617 Facsimile: (954) 585 4886 E-mail: jloren@lorenlaw.com rrustmann@goldbergloren.com ggoldberg@goldbergdohan.com WEATHERFORD INTERNATIONAL: "Grinenko" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay ------------------------------------------------------------- Vadim Grinenko, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Weatherford International, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 5:16-cv-00422 (W.D. Tex., May 5, 2016) seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and other damages under Section 216 of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff and other workers worked approximately 120 hours per week, 7 days a week as tubing conveyor perforation specialists. They claim that they never received overtime for all of the hours that they worked in excess of 40 hours in a single workweek. Weatherford is a Delaware limited liability company that currently maintains its corporate headquarters in Houston, Texas. It provides equipment and services used in the drilling, evaluation, completion, production, and intervention of oil and natural gas wells worldwide. It also offers drilling services, rotary steerable systems, directional drilling services, controlled and managed pressure drilling, under balanced drilling, air drilling, well testing, drilling with casing and drilling with liner systems and surface logging systems. Weatherford serves exploration, production and transmission sectors of the oil and natural gas industry. Plaintiffs represented by: Glenn D. Levy, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF GLENN D. LEVY 906 West Basse Road, Suite 100 San Antonio, TX 78212 Telephone: (210) 822-5666 Facsimile: (210) 822-5650 WILHELMINA INTERNATIONAL: Hearing This Month on Motion to Dismiss ----------------------------------------------------------------- Wilhelmina International, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 13, 2016, for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2016, that a hearing is scheduled this month on a motion to dismiss a class action lawsuit. The motion to dismiss has been fully briefed. On October 24, 2013, a purported class action lawsuit was brought against the Company by former Wilhelmina model Alex Shanklin and others (the "Shanklin Litigation"), in New York State Supreme Court (New York County) by the same lead counsel who represented plaintiffs in a prior, now-dismissed action brought by Louisa Raske (the "Raske Litigation"). The claims in the Shanklin Litigation initially included breach of contract and unjust enrichment allegations arising out of matters similar to the Raske Litigation, such as the handling and reporting of funds on behalf of models and the use of model images. Other parties named as defendants in the Shanklin Litigation include other model management companies, advertising firms, and certain advertisers. On January 6, 2014, the Company moved to dismiss the Amended Complaint in the Shanklin Litigation for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and other grounds, and other defendants also filed motions to dismiss. On August 11, 2014, the court denied the motion to dismiss as to Wilhelmina and other of the model management defendants. Further, on March 3, 2014, the judge assigned to the Shanklin Litigation wrote the Office of the New York Attorney General bringing the case to its attention, generally describing the claims asserted therein against the model management defendants, and stating that the case "may involve matters in the public interest." The judge's letter also enclosed a copy of his decision in the Raske Litigation, which dismissed that case. Plaintiffs have retained substitute counsel, who has filed a Second Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint asserts causes of action for alleged breaches of the plaintiffs' management contracts with the defendants, conversion, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, and unjust enrichment. The Second Amended Complaint also alleges that the plaintiff models were at all relevant times employees, and not independent contractors, of the model management defendants, and that defendants violated the New York Labor Law in several respects, including, among other things, by allegedly failing to pay the models the minimum wages and overtime pay required thereunder, not maintaining accurate payroll records, and not providing plaintiffs with full explanations of how their wages and deductions therefrom were computed. The Second Amended Complaint seeks certification of the action as a class action, damages in an amount to be determined at trial, plus interest, costs, attorneys' fees, and such other relief as the court deems proper. On October 6, 2015, Wilhelmina filed a motion to dismiss as to most of the claims in the Second Amended Complaint. The motion to dismiss has been fully briefed, and the Court scheduled a hearing on the motion to dismiss for April 2016. That hearing is now set for May 2016. The Company believes the claims asserted in the Second Amended Complaint are without merit, and intends to continue to vigorously defend the action. The primary business of Wilhelmina is fashion model management. WILLIAM COOK: Recalls Transjugular Intrahepatic Shunt Pack ---------------------------------------------------------- Starting date: April 25, 2016 Posting date: April 27, 2016 Type of communication: Medical Device Recall Subcategory: Medical Device Hazard classification: Type I Source of recall: Health CanadaIssue:Medical Devices Audience: General Public, Healthcare Professionals, Hospitals Identification number: RA-58104 There is an increase in reports of polymer degradation of the catheter tip, resulting in tip fracture and/or separation. Environmental conditions, such as storage temperature, humidity, and the use of vaporized hydrogen peroxide (VHP) for whole-room decontamination within healthcare facilities, may be contributing to the occurrence. There may be other undetermined contributors to this issue and continue to investigate. Potential adverse events that may occur as a result of catheter polymer degradation could include loss of device function, separation of a device segment leading to medical intervention, or complications resulting from a separated segment. Such complications include device fragments in the vascular system, genitourinary system, or other soft tissues. Fragments within the vascular system could result in embolization to the heart or lungs, or occluding blood flow to end organs. Affected products A. TRANSJUGULAR INTRAHEPATIC PORTOSYSTEMIC SHUNT PROCEDURE PACK Lot or serial number: All Model or catalog number: TIPSS-100 TIPSS-200 Manufacturer: William Cook Europe APS Sandet 6 Bjaeverskov 4632 DENMARK XPO LOGISTICS: "Hernandez" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages -------------------------------------------------- I. Hernandez and E. Ortiz, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. XPO Logistics, Inc., Pacer International, Inc., XPO Port Services, Inc., Intermodal Container Services, Inc. and Does 1 to 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 2:16-cv-03112 (C. D. Cal., May 5, 2016) seeks to recover wages, damages, liquidated damages, penalties, civil penalties, attorney's fees and costs of suit, prejudgment interest and such other and further relief under the California Labor Code Sec. 226.7 and Industrial Wage Order No. 9-2001. Defendant XPO Logistics, Inc., is a provider of transportation logistics services in North America and abroad. It wholly owns Pacer International, Inc., Pacer Cartage, Inc. and Intermodal Container Services, Inc. Plaintiffs allege that they were misclassified as contractors, hence, denied the basic benefits of employees. Plaintiffs represented by: Alan Harris, Esq. David Garrett, Esq. Rebecca Lee, Esq. Christina Nordsten, Esq. HARRIS & RUBLE 655 North Central Avenue, 17th Floor Glendale, California 91203 Telephone: 323.962.3777 Facsimile: 323.962.3004 ********* S U B S C R I P T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA. Marion Alcestis A. Castillon, Ma. Cristina Canson, Noemi Irene A. Adala, Joy A. Agravante, Valerie Udtuhan, Julie Anne L. Toledo, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors. Copyright 2016. All rights reserved. ISSN 1525-2272. This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior written permission of the publishers. Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but is not guaranteed. The CAR subscription rate is $775 for six months delivered via e-mail. Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof are $25 each. For subscription information, contact Peter A. Chapman at 215-945-7000 or Nina Novak at 202-362-8552. * * * End of Transmission * * *